14 replies to this topic

[TheHildebrandRarity]

***********SPOILER FREE QUANTUM OF SOLACE***************

Ok just seen the film, thought I’d make it spoiler free for those who haven't seen it (Mainly our American Friends ).

For those who loved the film - I can understand it.....
For those who hated the film - I can also understand it.....

I found there were a number of problems with the film for me to digest, which I had suspected of many months ago when hearing/reading some snippets. But I hoped for the best. This review isn’t about any bond traditions or anything like that, just purely as a film and how it would stand alone, here are some key spoiler free points:

1st, The plot of this film is so disjointed, it’s hard to really follow and make sense of what’s happening and at times you feel like you misunderstand certain scenes.
How everyone said Marc Forster is great at story telling is beyond me. That’s the first film I’ve seen in a long time where I didn't know what it was really about (having not read the synopsis and spoilers before hand), this film just isn’t very clear and even if it is about water and oil, it's rubbish, with many plot holes. It’s not interesting or even remotely decent. Someone please send an assassin to Pervis & Wade and make it quick...

2nd, The camera/editing is the worst thing about the film. This instantly struck me within the 1st 5 minutes. It’s so shaky, and the editing is so bad you can't really make out what’s going on in the first 30 mins as most of the scenes chop and change very quickly. How everyone said Marc Forster is great at visuals and camera effects is also beyond me as well. Its very similar to the "Transformers Movie" where the action is edited together so tight and quick its hard to make out what’s going on and how the action is executed. It really annoyed me as I couldn’t make out what was even happening.

3rd, Daniel Craig is very good, he is the only highlight of the film, he looks good, delivers his lines very well and looks great in the action scenes. A true credit to Fleming…

4th, Gemma Altherton was way out of her depth... totally mist cast as an mi6 agent/assistant.

5th, The script was OK, I can see why it had many rewrites, some scenes look like they were not finished or looked rushed. I have no idea why they had 4 writers for this movie, and with the amount of drafts and rewrites it’s a wonder how they actually got a script together in time. Maybe Haggis’s good work was undone, who knows….

6th, Reviewers that said the music was great, must have downloaded the wrong tracks. Please get a decent composer, I heard cues from the following, TND, TWINE, DAD and CR…. Familiar?..

7th, Nothing in the film really stood out. Reviewers have said that a few certain action scenes and a few locations are classics, which I may agree with. But most of them are “borrowed” from previous films.

Overall,
6.5/10, a very disjoined film/plot, never in a million years a masterpiece, Marc Forster is to blame (for those who didn't like it, he's a storyteller), not a patch on Casino Royale. Although I can see what they were trying to do, maybe they should had had a 2 year gap and tried to get it right.
But like in all films, whether it’s bond, action, sci fi, drama, thriller etc… there is 3 vital ingredient’s, and they are a good plot/script/ and director. Once you have them the rest then follows….

[Mr_Wint]

Totally agree You nail it.

I think it is around 6/10 as an action movie.

[Bond Bug]

***********SPOILER FREE QUANTUM OF SOLACE***************

Ok just seen the film, thought I’d make it spoiler free for those who haven't seen it (Mainly our American Friends ).

For those who loved the film - I can understand it.....
For those who hated the film - I can also understand it.....

I found there were a number of problems with the film for me to digest, which I had suspected of many months ago when hearing/reading some snippets. But I hoped for the best. This review isn’t about any bond traditions or anything like that, just purely as a film and how it would stand alone, here are some key spoiler free points:

1st, The plot of this film is so disjointed, it’s hard to really follow and make sense of what’s happening and at times you feel like you misunderstand certain scenes.
How everyone said Marc Forster is great at story telling is beyond me. That’s the first film I’ve seen in a long time where I didn't know what it was really about (having not read the synopsis and spoilers before hand), this film just isn’t very clear and even if it is about water and oil, it's rubbish, with many plot holes. It’s not interesting or even remotely decent. Someone please send an assassin to Pervis & Wade and make it quick...

2nd, The camera/editing is the worst thing about the film. This instantly struck me within the 1st 5 minutes. It’s so shaky, and the editing is so bad you can't really make out what’s going on in the first 30 mins as most of the scenes chop and change very quickly. How everyone said Marc Forster is great at visuals and camera effects is also beyond me as well. Its very similar to the "Transformers Movie" where the action is edited together so tight and quick its hard to make out what’s going on and how the action is executed. It really annoyed me as I couldn’t make out what was even happening.

3rd, Daniel Craig is very good, he is the only highlight of the film, he looks good, delivers his lines very well and looks great in the action scenes. A true credit to Fleming…

4th, Gemma Altherton was way out of her depth... totally mist cast as an mi6 agent/assistant.

5th, The script was OK, I can see why it had many rewrites, some scenes look like they were not finished or looked rushed. I have no idea why they had 4 writers for this movie, and with the amount of drafts and rewrites it’s a wonder how they actually got a script together in time. Maybe Haggis’s good work was undone, who knows….

6th, Reviewers that said the music was great, must have downloaded the wrong tracks. Please get a decent composer, I heard cues from the following, TND, TWINE, DAD and CR…. Familiar?..

7th, Nothing in the film really stood out. Reviewers have said that a few certain action scenes and a few locations are classics, which I may agree with. But most of them are “borrowed” from previous films.

Overall,
6.5/10, a very disjoined film/plot, never in a million years a masterpiece, Marc Forster is to blame (for those who didn't like it, he's a storyteller), not a patch on Casino Royale. Although I can see what they were trying to do, maybe they should had had a 2 year gap and tried to get it right.
But like in all films, whether it’s bond, action, sci fi, drama, thriller etc… there is 3 vital ingredient’s, and they are a good plot/script/ and director. Once you have them the rest then follows….

Agree points 1 and 2 and Gemma Atherton stood out like a sore thumb - with only a few lines her accent was all over the place and she looked self-conscious. That was the worst acting I have seen in any Bond movie.

Jason Bourne got my heart racing, just him in the train station, because of the music. That music, beating away like a heartbeat helped turn the mediocre into something very tense. That was lacking in QOS and it would have been nice to hear the James Bond theme more, but David Arnold is good IMO at the tender ans scenic moments.

[CaptainPower]

To be fair to Gemma she really wasn't given much to work with.

[quantumofsolace]

1. the plot is not difficult to follow if you pay attention and know CR
2. i liked the style but i can see how some may hate it
3. yes
4. she was fine playing a young op - out of her depth
5. see 1
6. It is DA's best Bond, but a change would be okay for now
7. The whole film stood out for its guts in trying something new and succeeding

[Alfred Blacking]

To be fair to Gemma she really wasn't given much to work with.

Yes, while I agree with much of Thehildebrandrarity's review, I think that he's being hard on Gemma. If you've seen her Tess, then you'll know that she can act. To be honest, I wouldn't like to criticise anyone's acting in this film, because I don't believe that we were allowed to see their acting (although Judy Dench would shine even in a 20 second commercial). I'm still not sure whether it was the scriptwriting, the directing or the editing, but we just didn't get to explore the characters in any depth.

This was particularly so with Gemma's character. I think the way Bond would interact with this first young woman after Vesper would be particularly important, but we're never allowed to see that. I'm sure that the footage on the floor must show more of that, and with it, more of Gemma and DC's acting skills.

[deth]

6th, Reviewers that said the music was great, must have downloaded the wrong tracks. Please get a decent composer, I heard cues from the following, TND, TWINE, DAD and CR…. Familiar?..

Um.... no you didn't. Perhaps you heard a bit of the Bond theme in there? Have you listened to the soundtrack outside of the film? If not, perhaps you should.

and furthermore, if you hear some similarity to something from the past for just a couple seconds, what's so wrong with that? It's not like he's repeating anything exactly.

or, even more precisely, would you mind pointing out which tracks are copies of something previous?

[HildebrandRarity]

***********SPOILER FREE QUANTUM OF SOLACE***************

Ok just seen the film, thought I’d make it spoiler free for those who haven't seen it (Mainly our American Friends ).

1st, The plot of this film is so disjointed, it’s hard to really follow and make sense of what’s happening and at times you feel like you misunderstand certain scenes.

That’s the first film I’ve seen in a long time where I didn't know what it was really about (having not read the synopsis and spoilers before hand), this film just isn’t very clear and even if it is about water and oil, it's rubbish, with many plot holes.

The Other Hildebrand here...

I am under the impression - and it's the impression with which i'm going in to the theatre in two Fridays - is that Q0S is about James Bond ultimately tracking down the person who propelled Vesper into betraying him and then drowning herself - in order to get his quantum of solace. That everything else is a means to get to that end, including dealing with Greene.

Secondly, the movie - in my mind - is about Bond thinking about the big picture instead of killing without thought...and thus becoming a 'real' 00.

Am I correct in taking those assumptions with me into the theatre on the 14th?

If so, am I likely to be less 'dissappointed'?

Thoughts would be welcome.

[Bond Bug]

1. the plot is not difficult to follow if you pay attention and know CR

Can you please explain how Quantum are going to "control the world's water supply" to quote Greene.

[HildebrandRarity]

1. the plot is not difficult to follow if you pay attention and know CR

Can you please explain how Quantum are going to "control the world's water supply" to quote Greene.

WHO EVER ANSWERS BOND BUG...COULD YOU KINDLY PUT SAID ANSWER IN "SPOILERS".

Thanks. It's "Spoiler Free" review, after all.

[Bond Bug]

To be fair to Gemma she really wasn't given much to work with.

Yes, while I agree with much of Thehildebrandrarity's review, I think that he's being hard on Gemma. If you've seen her Tess, then you'll know that she can act. To be honest, I wouldn't like to criticise anyone's acting in this film, because I don't believe that we were allowed to see their acting (although Judy Dench would shine even in a 20 second commercial). I'm still not sure whether it was the scriptwriting, the directing or the editing, but we just didn't get to explore the characters in any depth.

This was particularly so with Gemma's character. I think the way Bond would interact with this first young woman after Vesper would be particularly important, but we're never allowed to see that. I'm sure that the footage on the floor must show more of that, and with it, more of Gemma and DC's acting skills.

Her accent was inconsistent and she was overacting - maybe she was told to do that, but it looked shockingly bad IMO.

1. the plot is not difficult to follow if you pay attention and know CR

Can you please explain how Quantum are going to "control the world's water supply" to quote Greene.

WHO EVER ANSWERS BOND BUG...COULD YOU KINDLY PUT SAID ANSWER IN "SPOILERS".

Thanks. It's "Spoiler Free" review, after all.

Don't hold your breath! I am not expecting an answer.

[TheHildebrandRarity]

***********SPOILER FREE QUANTUM OF SOLACE***************

Ok just seen the film, thought I’d make it spoiler free for those who haven't seen it (Mainly our American Friends ).

1st, The plot of this film is so disjointed, it’s hard to really follow and make sense of what’s happening and at times you feel like you misunderstand certain scenes.

That’s the first film I’ve seen in a long time where I didn't know what it was really about (having not read the synopsis and spoilers before hand), this film just isn’t very clear and even if it is about water and oil, it's rubbish, with many plot holes.

The Other Hildebrand here...

I am under the impression - and it's the impression with which i'm going in to the theatre in two Fridays - is that Q0S is about James Bond ultimately tracking down the person who propelled Vesper into betraying him and then drowning herself - in order to get his quantum of solace. That everything else is a means to get to that end, including dealing with Greene.

Secondly, the movie - in my mind - is about Bond thinking about the big picture instead of killing without thought...and thus becoming a 'real' 00.

Am I correct in taking those assumptions with me into the theatre on the 14th?

If so, am I likely to be less 'dissappointed'?

Thoughts would be welcome.

Hello,
Well it's hard to really explain it, I guess your pretty much correct in what your thinking, but the main problem for me is that the plot is a little confussing and disjointed - so much that its hard to sometimes understand how things come about. If you look at FRWL, GF, OHMSS, FYEO,TB etc... they all had easy to follow plots and storys that anyone could follow, QOS wasn't very clear.
Also the fast pace of the film didn't help and the editing is too close and tight. For example, *Spoiler free* there is a car chase at the start, but its edited so tight and quick that even now, the next day, I cannot remember any of it (because it was too fast)!! Also another example, *spoiler fee* there is meant to be a fantastic roof/sewer chase, but again its shot so quickly that you can't see whats going on.
Ultimately that was what ruined the film for me, if they had slowed it down I think I could had probably digested it a lot easier.
But I think you need to see and judge for yourself, as some reviewers have rated it 9/10, which I can understand if you like that type of film. Without a doubt it is the most unusual of bond films.

Edited by TheHildebrandRarity, 02 November 2008 - 10:20 AM.

[Colonel Moon]

Wasn't P&W script dumped? Haggis was working on it most time

[Alfred Blacking]

I am under the impression - and it's the impression with which i'm going in to the theatre in two Fridays - is that Q0S is about James Bond ultimately tracking down the person who propelled Vesper into betraying him and then drowning herself - in order to get his quantum of solace. That everything else is a means to get to that end, including dealing with Greene.

Secondly, the movie - in my mind - is about Bond thinking about the big picture instead of killing without thought...and thus becoming a 'real' 00.

Am I correct in taking those assumptions with me into the theatre on the 14th?

If so, am I likely to be less 'dissappointed'?

Well, I think that's probably the idea, but I'm not sure that you'll be less disappointed for knowing it. The people who were disappointed (myself included) seem to feel that we're not really with Bond on this journey, that we're never let inside his armour, that we are never allowed to feel or empathise with his pain. We feel that the pace and editing of the film don't allow us to care about him or allow the necessary extent of characterisation.

Those who like the film seem to feel that an implied subtext through the narrative gives us what you suggest, those who didn't like it wanted more depth through reflection (a la Casino Royale's).

[TheHildebrandRarity]

If you like fast paced films with quick editing then you'll love it. If your looking for a FRWL,CR type of pace then if may upset you in someways. The interesting thing about this film, is that Quantum Of Solace is actually in the last 2 mins of the film, and its actually the best scene in the whole film, as it gives you time to understand whats happened. You'll see what I mean when you see it,

Wasn't P&W script dumped? Haggis was working on it most time

I'm not really sure. I know that the film went through various drafts, rewrites and I think in some scenes they wrote as they filmed. I don't think they can really do that in a film like this, and probably why it was disjoined as it's almost like it wasn't finished.