20 replies to this topic

[Fozzco]

Could someone point me in the direction of the original review of Quantum - around September time when it was put up after seeing the first screener show please?

[oatesy]

Do you mean the now confirmed fake review that appeared on imdb? If so:

http://debrief.comma...showtopic=48927

[stamper]

It's probably a review of an early draft of a script, probably Haggis one.

[Harmsway]

It's probably a review of an early draft of a script, probably Haggis one.

It's pretty clear now that the IMDB review was just lies, with facts gleaned from articles and spoiler reports elsewhere. I don't see any reason to believe that the IMDB fellow had access to any genuine behind-the-scenes info.

[stamper]

Well, I didn't paid any attention to what he said that was in the final movie, I paid attention to the stuff that wasn't. Plus the hint about the cut ending, which eventually we found out to be true (even if we don't know the complete specifics yet) makes me think either it's someone who have read an early draft and passed it on as a rough cut review, or someone who really have seen a rough cut.

I wouldn't blindly dismiss it like everyone seems to do. On the contrary, it's full on hints it might be sourced from genuine material, be it a rough draft or rough cut, not in the similarities to the final movie, but the differences. It's those differences that are of interest.

Notice for example he speaks about Camille being killed... Camille which is nowhere to be seen in the scene where Bond get rid of Greeene, until one final added shot of the car in the desert... Notice how Greene in the final movie have mostly nothing to do against Bond, apart from being there, when we know from the starts he is planning on killing Camille... It's not like they forgot to write him doing bad deeds, it's that they probably cut them out...

Notice how they cut out the Greene interrogation by Bond about Quantum... They didn't cut it out just so that people should see the next one to get to know more, they cut it out because it didn't fit the way they changed things in the script, and had no time to reshoot this scene...

I'm persuaded Greene killed Camille at some point in the finale, or trew her at the General who raped and killed her, and that they reshot the fight with the general to make it DAD like because it was too bleak. Then we would have had a full on reason for Bond to be pissed at Greene in the final. As it stands, Greene is of no threat to 007 other than the final physical fight in the finale. He is a failed / bland bad guy. At least Le Chiffre tried to poison Bond, then gave him a good bollocking.

Here's what I think was reshot / recut :

- Camille killed by Greene or the General, changed to the general fighting Camille and him being killed.

- Bond killing the general.

- Scene where Greene spills the beans about Quantum, being cut. Notice how Camille is absent and not seen in the car when Bond leaves Greene, but suddenly appears in one last shot at the end. It makes no sense, from a director's standpoint, to have Camille staying in the car when Bond is getting rid of her lover, she should be involved in this scene, and yet, she is nowhere on sight. That's because when they shot the scene, she was probably bloody dead until they changed their minds.

- I'm pretty sure the finale with Vesper's boyfriends is a reshoot or last minute rewrite. My guess is that the boyfriend was found dead originally in the script (as said in the beginning), and forgotten. They added the "faked death" thing in post production / inserts reshoots.

At the scene where M tells about this faked death that make no sense (why would an organisation as strong as Quantum bother if all it would take MI6 is minutes to see it's a fake), notice the insert where 007 steals the pics from the table, how they keep cutting to Mr White to cover up overdubbed lines, and how his shirt collar keep changing from shot to shot. Either the continuity girl was blind (which I doubt) and the editor crazy, or it means rushed reshoots and had to cover new lines of dialogue via editing. I think the boyfriend thing was originaly sealed at the beginning of the movie, and that was it. The guy was dead.

As it stands, this scene with the MI6 girl and Vesper's boyfriend is ridiculous, and don't fit with the end of CR. It also demeans all Vesper's actions in CR, lowering her character to a naive girl who would fall afoul of a lover's manipulating her emotions. It's one of the worse offence of this movie.

- So how did it went originaly ? Greene probably said to Bond where the head of Quantum was, and that led to the final confrontation in Moscow, where Bond probably found another guy (the one mentioned in the end of the game). Bond let the head of the organisation live, and that would seal his arc... Then he would be back in London, and confronted by Mr White, who would shoot him.

All the story would have been about Bond walking his way up to the echelon of the organisation... not to just find Vesper's boyfriend.

NOW we would have really what Foster was hinting, a 70's like political thriller, like 3 days of the Condor. Instead, they changed things to make it more DAD like, probably because the test audience was too surprised.

Time will tell, and if Haggis draft emerges on pdf somewhere, I'm sure we will get all the answers about the elliptical nature of the movie.

[Fozzco]

Yes.. that's the one - cheers.
I'm fairly sure that this was genuine - I'm sure what he discribed was a pre-final edit -which was the whole point of the screening - to see how it played out with an audience. Wish they'd release this edit. Hopefully some of the edited scenes will be on the DVD next year.

Edited by Fozzco, 02 November 2008 - 10:01 AM.

[Jim]

Notice for example he speaks about Camille being killed... Camille which is nowhere to be seen in the scene where Bond get rid of Greeene, until one final added shot of the car in the desert, which screams additional last minute shoot... Notice how Greene in the final movie have mostly nothing to do against Bond, apart from being there, when we know from the starts he is planning on killing Camille...

It's a different car, isn't it?

[Zorin Industries]

Can I please tell folk that reshoots are not a sign of any bad film making practise. They are a normal necessity. Also, it was highly unlikely that CAMILLE died in any version of the film. Editing a film takes time. You can't restructure a whole feature based on the whims of a test audience and then get the film out in time.

And Stamper - not everyone thinks Marc Forster failed in his attempts to make a 1970's style thriller. And having a narrative theory based on what you wanted to see and what was rumoured months ago is not the same as what was either written, filmed, edited or re-edited.

[Captain Tightpants]

- Scene where Greene spills the beans about Quantum, being cut out. Notice how Camille is absent and not seen in the car when Bond leaves Greene, but suddenly appears in one last shot at the end. It makes no sense, from a director's standpoint, to have Camille staying in the car when Bond get rid of her lover, she should be involved in this scene, and yet, she is nowhere on sight. That's because when they shot the scene, she was bloody dead !

Um, wasn't Camille trying to use Greene to get to Medrano to kill him, rather than kill Greene? That's why she doesn't need to be there. And if the scene where Greene spilt the beans was cut - assuming it was there at all - it's probably because we'll be finding out about it in the next film.

- I'm pretty sure the finale with Vesper's boyfriends is a reshoot. My guess is that the boyfriend was found dead originally in the script (as said in the beginning) and they added the "faked death" thing in post production / inserts reshoots. Notice the insert where 007 steals the pics from the table, and how his shirt collar keep changing from shot to shot during the scene. Either the continuity girl was blind (which I doubt) either it means rushed reshoots. I think the boyfriend thing was sealed at the beginning of the movie, and that was it. The guy was dead. As it stands, this scene is ridiculous, and don't fit with the end of CR.

- So how did it went ? Greene probably said to Bond where the head of Quantum was, and that the final confrontation in Moscow. Bond let the head of the organisation live, and that would seal his arc... Then he would be back in London, and confronted by Mr White, who would shoot him.

Scenes were re-written before they were shot, usually to take advantage of the location in someway, as was stated in one of the production blogs. Most likely the re-writes related to the actual location of everything relative to each other; apparently the original plan for the Tosca sequence involved Bond listening to Quantum at a kind of UN-like forum. According to Forster, it invoved Bond trying to tap into different frequencies to listen in, often catching snatches of dialogue on other languages.

If ever a scene was re-written after it was shot, it was most likely because the actors and Forster felt the dialogue didn't sound right. Of course, I don't think you'd pick up on that. It's all a conspiracy to make the film worse.

NOW we would have really what Foster was hinting, a 70's like political thriller, like 3 days of the Condor. Instead, they changed things to make it more DAD like, probably because the test audience was too surprised.

Time will tell, and if Haggis draft emerges on pdf somewhere, I'm sure we will get all the answers about the elliptical nature of the movie.

My God, that has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard on the entre internet!

[Zorin Industries]

- Scene where Greene spills the beans about Quantum, being cut out. Notice how Camille is absent and not seen in the car when Bond leaves Greene, but suddenly appears in one last shot at the end. It makes no sense, from a director's standpoint, to have Camille staying in the car when Bond get rid of her lover, she should be involved in this scene, and yet, she is nowhere on sight. That's because when they shot the scene, she was bloody dead !

Um, wasn't Camille trying to use Greene to get to Medrano to kill him, rather than kill Greene? That's why she doesn't need to be there. And if the scene where Greene spilt the beans was cut - assuming it was there at all - it's probably because we'll be finding out about it in the next film.

- I'm pretty sure the finale with Vesper's boyfriends is a reshoot. My guess is that the boyfriend was found dead originally in the script (as said in the beginning) and they added the "faked death" thing in post production / inserts reshoots. Notice the insert where 007 steals the pics from the table, and how his shirt collar keep changing from shot to shot during the scene. Either the continuity girl was blind (which I doubt) either it means rushed reshoots. I think the boyfriend thing was sealed at the beginning of the movie, and that was it. The guy was dead. As it stands, this scene is ridiculous, and don't fit with the end of CR.

- So how did it went ? Greene probably said to Bond where the head of Quantum was, and that the final confrontation in Moscow. Bond let the head of the organisation live, and that would seal his arc... Then he would be back in London, and confronted by Mr White, who would shoot him.

Scenes were re-written before they were shot, usually to take advantage of the location in someway, as was stated in one of the production blogs. Most likely the re-writes related to the actual location of everything relative to each other; apparently the original plan for the Tosca sequence involved Bond listening to Quantum at a kind of UN-like forum. According to Forster, it invoved Bond trying to tap into different frequencies to listen in, often catching snatches of dialogue on other languages.

If ever a scene was re-written after it was shot, it was most likely because the actors and Forster felt the dialogue didn't sound right. Of course, I don't think you'd pick up on that. It's all a conspiracy to make the film worse.

NOW we would have really what Foster was hinting, a 70's like political thriller, like 3 days of the Condor. Instead, they changed things to make it more DAD like, probably because the test audience was too surprised.

Time will tell, and if Haggis draft emerges on pdf somewhere, I'm sure we will get all the answers about the elliptical nature of the movie.

My God, that has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard on the entre internet!

Welcome to CBN!!

[Jim]

Time will tell, and if Haggis draft emerges on pdf somewhere, I'm sure we will get all the answers about the elliptical nature of the movie.

I sincerely hope not. I admire its elliptical nature. Had more than enough of tidy endings where everything is explained and James Bond done killed the baddie and kissed the girl, urr snogging.

[Captain Tightpants]

Welcome to CBN!!

Sometimes I wonder why I argue for a film I haven't seen against a person who clearly wants to see it fail.

It's then that I realise it's because I really don't want to study for my exam on accounting information systems ...

[Zorin Industries]

Welcome to CBN!!

Sometimes I wonder why I argue for a film I haven't seen against a person who clearly wants to see it fail.

It's then that I realise it's because I really don't want to study for my exam on accounting information systems ...

As long as those accounting information systems are not deemed to be too short, badly directed, confusing, over edited and put their gunbarrel at the end then you will be fine.

[SecretAgentFan]

Well, I didn't paid any attention to what he said that was in the final movie, I paid attention to the stuff that wasn't. Plus the hint about the cut ending, which eventually we found out to be true (even if we don't know the complete specifics yet) makes me think either it's someone who have read an early draft and passed it on as a rough cut review, or someone who really have seen a rough cut.

I wouldn't blindly dismiss it like everyone seems to do. On the contrary, it's full on hints it might be sourced from genuine material, be it a rough draft or rough cut, not in the similarities to the final movie, but the differences. It's those differences that are of interest.

Notice for example he speaks about Camille being killed... Camille which is nowhere to be seen in the scene where Bond get rid of Greeene, until one final added shot of the car in the desert... Notice how Greene in the final movie have mostly nothing to do against Bond, apart from being there, when we know from the starts he is planning on killing Camille... It's not like they forgot to write him doing bad deeds, it's that they probably cut them out...

Notice how they cut out the Greene interrogation by Bond about Quantum... They didn't cut it out just so that people should see the next one to get to know more, they cut it out because it didn't fit the way they changed things in the script, and had no time to reshoot this scene...

I'm persuaded Greene killed Camille at some point in the finale, or trew her at the General who raped and killed her, and that they reshot the fight with the general to make it DAD like because it was too bleak. Then we would have had a full on reason for Bond to be pissed at Greene in the final. As it stands, Greene is of no threat to 007 other than the final physical fight in the finale. He is a failed / bland bad guy. At least Le Chiffre tried to poison Bond, then gave him a good bollocking.

Here's what I think was reshot / recut :

- Camille killed by Greene or the General, changed to the general fighting Camille and him being killed.

- Bond killing the general.

- Scene where Greene spills the beans about Quantum, being cut. Notice how Camille is absent and not seen in the car when Bond leaves Greene, but suddenly appears in one last shot at the end. It makes no sense, from a director's standpoint, to have Camille staying in the car when Bond is getting rid of her lover, she should be involved in this scene, and yet, she is nowhere on sight. That's because when they shot the scene, she was probably bloody dead until they changed their minds.

- I'm pretty sure the finale with Vesper's boyfriends is a reshoot or last minute rewrite. My guess is that the boyfriend was found dead originally in the script (as said in the beginning), and forgotten. They added the "faked death" thing in post production / inserts reshoots.

At the scene where M tells about this faked death that make no sense (why would an organisation as strong as Quantum bother if all it would take MI6 is minutes to see it's a fake), notice the insert where 007 steals the pics from the table, how they keep cutting to Mr White to cover up overdubbed lines, and how his shirt collar keep changing from shot to shot. Either the continuity girl was blind (which I doubt) and the editor crazy, or it means rushed reshoots and had to cover new lines of dialogue via editing. I think the boyfriend thing was originaly sealed at the beginning of the movie, and that was it. The guy was dead.

As it stands, this scene with the MI6 girl and Vesper's boyfriend is ridiculous, and don't fit with the end of CR. It also demeans all Vesper's actions in CR, lowering her character to a naive girl who would fall afoul of a lover's manipulating her emotions. It's one of the worse offence of this movie.

- So how did it went originaly ? Greene probably said to Bond where the head of Quantum was, and that led to the final confrontation in Moscow, where Bond probably found another guy (the one mentioned in the end of the game). Bond let the head of the organisation live, and that would seal his arc... Then he would be back in London, and confronted by Mr White, who would shoot him.

All the story would have been about Bond walking his way up to the echelon of the organisation... not to just find Vesper's boyfriend.

NOW we would have really what Foster was hinting, a 70's like political thriller, like 3 days of the Condor. Instead, they changed things to make it more DAD like, probably because the test audience was too surprised.

Time will tell, and if Haggis draft emerges on pdf somewhere, I'm sure we will get all the answers about the elliptical nature of the movie.

Man, everything that could supposedly have been good about the movie you credit to Haggis. You even think that a fake review is legit and shows that EON re-cut this movie frantically. This is getting really annoying.

[Captain Tightpants]

As long as those accounting information systems are not deemed to be too short, badly directed, confusing, over edited and put their gunbarrel at the end then you will be fine.

Yeah, see that's the problem ... I've had my lecturer before and I know exactly the types of questions she will ask. And most of them will be about the shotcomings of particular infomration systems.

[HildebrandRarity]

stamper, you lost your mind old bean? Moo Moo put you up to this via Graham Rye, right?

[stamper]

Time will tell old boy, time will tell...

[HildebrandRarity]

Time will tell old boy, time will tell...

What time frame are you talking about?

Three weeks, by which time the North American box office finishes it's 2nd weekend run?

Jan 1, 09, by which time the world-wide box office numbers are effectively known?

OR

November 2, next year, by which time we will have rumblings from Wilson and Broccoli about Bond 23?


BTW,

I wouldn't go Banco on a 'weak' box office for Q0S. The only thing standing in the way of CR-type gross is the huge depreciation of the Pound and other currencies since late '06.

In retrospect, it looks like Casino Royale's box office was inflated by currency movements...at a time when the US Dollar was a lot lower than now.

[Harmsway]

Well, I didn't paid any attention to what he said that was in the final movie, I paid attention to the stuff that wasn't. Plus the hint about the cut ending, which eventually we found out to be true (even if we don't know the complete specifics yet) makes me think either it's someone who have read an early draft and passed it on as a rough cut review, or someone who really have seen a rough cut.

It's too drastic to have been a rough cut. Forster said the only significant deleted footage was that one minute-long cliffhanger and that everything else he shot made it into the film. So we have to take him at his word, and it means there's not room to believe that there's oodles of footage that was shot and unused.

[HildebrandRarity]

Well, I didn't paid any attention to what he said that was in the final movie, I paid attention to the stuff that wasn't. Plus the hint about the cut ending, which eventually we found out to be true (even if we don't know the complete specifics yet) makes me think either it's someone who have read an early draft and passed it on as a rough cut review, or someone who really have seen a rough cut.

It's too drastic to have been a rough cut. Forster said the only significant deleted footage was that one minute-long cliffhanger and that everything else he shot made it into the film. So we have to take him at his word, and it means there's not room to believe that there's oodles of footage that was shot and unused.

Especially since he was told that "here's the budget. It's massive. But you can't go over." I read he said that.

We all know that it's the most expensive movie ever made on a per minute basis. Why would they waste money by leaving a material amount of un-used footage on the floor?

[SecretAgentFan]

They did not. Our dear Monsieur Stamper just likes to heat up the conversation - or he really believes in what he says. In which case I will just respect his opinion but file it under "no use for me".