Question about QOS? (Big Spoiler)
#1
Posted 02 November 2008 - 01:57 AM
#2
Posted 02 November 2008 - 02:03 AM
#3
Posted 02 November 2008 - 02:05 AM
Being in the US, I have not seen it yet. I am trying to stay pretty spoiler free but am already aware of the GF/oil scene. How did it play? Was it as big an homage on screen as it seemed in the stills. Any music cues that harken back to GF? Did it fit well within the movie? Thanks. Keep me as spoiler free as possible.
To answer as spoiler-less-ly as possible:
It plays well.
It was not as grand an homage as it may have appeared. The editing, shot choices and order - plus the context - gave the scene its own identity. (Had the girl been laying in a different position, and not on a bed, the fuss would have been much less.)
The music does its own thing rather than force any particular homage.
It fits very well within the movie and is part of my favourite, lengthy section of the film, including arguably the best section of dialogue.
#4
Posted 02 November 2008 - 02:12 AM
It was handled terribly. No slow panning of the camera. Blink and you'd miss it. Tou don't really see the entire body if I remember right.
Greene is an environmentalist interested in oil. "oh no he's not!" says Bond, when he sees a dam, "it's the water he's interested in."
Later he sees Agent Fields covered in oil on the bed. M is there who says "it shows he's interested in oil."
"It's just a distraction," pleads Bond. "He's really interested in water."
- dialogue based on memory only
So IMO the whole oil thing was only in the script to foreshadow this one shot that was then wasted.
#5
Posted 02 November 2008 - 03:39 AM
SPOILER ALERT
It was handled terribly. No slow panning of the camera. Blink and you'd miss it. Tou don't really see the entire body if I remember right.
Greene is an environmentalist interested in oil. "oh no he's not!" says Bond, when he sees a dam, "it's the water he's interested in."
Later he sees Agent Fields covered in oil on the bed. M is there who says "it shows he's interested in oil."
"It's just a distraction," pleads Bond. "He's really interested in water."
- dialogue based on memory only
So IMO the whole oil thing was only in the script to foreshadow this one shot that was then wasted.
Well no, without the oil angle the CIA wouldnt play ball with Greene. The plot's a bit oblique - and I think it probably is a weakness - but it does ultimately make sense.
#6
Posted 02 November 2008 - 07:15 PM
#7
Posted 02 November 2008 - 07:19 PM
It was handled terribly.
I strongly, strongly... STRONGLY DISAGREE with that.
The scene was beautiful, Daniels reactions were great. It's wasn't 'blink and you miss it' either it showed you once, it showed you again and... wait... oh hang on... it showed you AGAIN aswell. So either you've seen a different movie, or you have selective sight.
#8
Posted 02 November 2008 - 08:05 PM
SPOILER ALERT!!!!
Are well all clear about Mathis's situation, I'm sure he was always a member of Quantum from the dialogue between him and Bond.
What does everyone else think, it's subtle but I believe what I gleamed from it was that Mathis was Quantum and then sold out in the bigger scheme of things?
Thats what I think how did you others see it?
My Wife didn't spot it's and most likely she's a fair representation of the general public not being a Bond fan like myself, I spotted the first time round and it seemed even more clear the 2nd time with my Wife.
Did I read this wrong?
#9
Posted 02 November 2008 - 08:10 PM
#10
Posted 02 November 2008 - 08:12 PM
One question I need to ask those who've seen it?
SPOILER ALERT!!!!
Are well all clear about Mathis's situation, I'm sure he was always a member of Quantum from the dialogue between him and Bond.
Discuss here, in the spoiler section:
http://debrief.comma...showtopic=50853
#11
Posted 15 November 2008 - 03:39 AM