Now I am going to list my pros and cons:
CONS (to get the glaring stench out of the way):
*The film begins, going out of it's way to be anything but a Bond movie. It starts with a rather concerning, dreary Hans Zimmer Dark Knight wallpaper/keyboard string line as we move into the pre title car chase. AWFUL
*The car chase, as with every action scene in the movie, is shot for no reason in that predictably obnoxious Greengrass/Bourne handheld, long lens style with annoying (and pointless) over editing. Forster's main unit work is very gracefully photographed and bares absolutely no resemblence to Dan Bradley's "Bourne brand" action scenes. It's impossible to tell what's going on in any of the action scenes. Geography, time, choreography, proxemics and space are all terminated by needlessly overwobbly camerawork, cramped MOVING compositions and editing to the point where you don't know (or care) what is going on. Again, Forster's main unit work breathes elegance, so the clash is beyond having two totally different films edited together. If you thought the second unit work in TWINE stuck out like a sore thumb, Bradley makes Vic Armstrong look like Peter Hunt. Even Simon Crane's Panama boat chase suffers the same horribly pathetic direction, thus cancelling out the impressive stunt work. MASSIVE FAIL
Why Alexander Witt and Stuart Baird were not kept aboard for QOS is....
*Editing:
Wow. It's horrible. Uniformly so. The classical but beautifully rhthymed pace of CR is tossed aside for imitation Bourne copycatting, at Bond's expense. Don't be fooled by the rabid fanboys into believing that this style is just building on what Peter Hunt created in the 60s, because that's just demented zealot nonsense. Hunt, while influenced by other filmmakers, literally set the standard for spy/action movie editing as we know it today. There was no genre template as Hunt designed it from scratch. On QOS there is no creation from scratch; the editing is just the Bourne template ripped off the shelf and imposed onto Bond, and for insecure fashion purposes only. It's exactly the same mentality as hiring Christian Wagner to make DIE ANOTHER DAY look like a Bruckheimer/Rob Cohen movie, and the results are just as painfully regrettable.
More on this later, but QOS is such a gorgeous looking movie with so many incredible set pieces and plot points that the unoriginal Bourne editing is a real detriment to the piece. Some of the epic camera moves in the desert for example, LAWRENCE quality, are mutiliated by choppy, innappropriate cutting that favours close ups even when every thing is clearly there in the master. It really ruins the pacing too. The HITH-HIKERS GUIDE style computer scene at MI6 suffers considerably (you'll know what I mean when you see the film).
To the best of my memory there is only one unbroken shot throughout QOS, and that is the back kissing with Fields. Lush, gorgeous and Bondian. See?
It seems pretty obvious that Marc Forster wouldn't know how to direct an action sequence if walked out in front of him, and that's fine. You need a decent second unit director and also maybe an extra action orientated editor to help you and your editor meet the deadline. Fine. However, the shallow Bourne transplant executed here was just pathetic.
*Title Sequence:
Hideous. The dancing girls were a welcome return to form, but that aside you really appreciate how faithful Daniel Kleinman had been to the Bond franchise up until this point. Not only is the image quality GRAINY as hell in this title sequence, but the appalling font choice and animation make it look like a bad Soderbergh Ocean's movie or even a Guy Ritchie movie flash advert. Yuck.
*MK12
There's a reason why the subtitles in Bond movies have kept to a very classical font for 40 years. Worse is the way the graphics are often blended to deceive you into thinking they are physically part of the locations (the hotels for example), which backfires horribly with all of the bad editing, which just makes it all confusing. In his defence, I can appreciate that Forster might have wanted to mess things up for Eon's recent tedency to add naff DVD-generated subititles to Bond movies!
*Visual Effects
Wow. What a drop in quality from CR. No miniatures, and it shows. For some reason the crap CGI plane from DIE ANOTHER DAY makes an appearance here too. Mix in lots of confusing Bourne edit selections and you get a cartoon head ache. I was stunned to see that even the CGI Camille had her tiny black dress sewn together as not to show her underwear when she became a watery computer graphic/plastic composite on the wides.
*Gunbarrel:
Craig is trying so hard to catch up with that mistimed gunbarrel (that curiously has no leaves in it, despite the fact the CGI artists could afford to write the title in afterwards, for no reason), that his shoulders sway and he walks like a Chav. Well done.
*References to Bond history:
Let's not even mention the Eaton homage, which is everything Jinx was to Ursula Andress (or is it referencing the TWINE title sequence)??
THE PROS
After the first twent minutes of non-stop dreary Bourne cut and paste action, not knowing where I am and no Bond movie in sight, I was about to walk out. Honestly, for anyone who hasn't seen the movie and is reading this, STICK IT OUT TIL THE OPERA!!!!! All of a sudden, I could overlook the horrific editing, and I had a ball. No, I am not being ironic. Crap second unit work and editing aside, this is a fantastic James Bond movie. The whole Tosca scene by the way is straight out of a Lewis Gilbert Bond movie, using a theatrical performance as the background to a fight (think pyramids scene from SWLM), ad it even ends with the "where's Feckish?" tie/ledge moment from SWLM!
Craig was fantastic, Dench (yes DENCH) was not annoying but functional, Olga delicious and Rory Kinnear as Tanner was very good too. Too bad the villain looked like Mark from Peepshow, but I can overlook that.
One of Forster's strongest points as a director I felt was in his use of multiple dialogue subtitles within scenes. The taxi sequence for example, where you actually feel like you are in another country and not watching a postcard.
The film looks STUNNING too, and like the peak Bonds this film is driven by it's mise en scene as much as it's dialogue. We haven't seen Bonds look this visual since Gilbert was around, and Forster remains closest to Gilbert by way of Peter Hunt as director, btw. Ken Adam AND SYD CAIN are gloriously acknowledged (I love the our introduction to M on the tower block, echoing Cain's design for Billie Whitelaw's entrance on Hitchcock's FRENZY). Even Peter Murton's MWTGG lair interior finds itself materialised at the film's climax. I really hope Dennis Gassner returns for future Bond movies. It pains me to think how amazing he could have made the title location from CASINO ROYALE look instead of that budget Travelodge that ended up in the film.
Louise Frogley's costumes are also a fresh of colour coordinated fresh air. Note that everyone in the movie wears stark black and white outfits throughout the movie, a simple design tactic to help compliment Gassner's compelling set design.
Roberto Schaefer's photography is just unbelievable. To think this was shot super35 and it makes the anamorphic likes of TOMORROW NEVER DIES and DIE ANOTHER DAY look criminally unimpressive. If Schaefer had been allowed to shoot anamorphic (apparently his original wish) then... I just don't know. It's as though Schaefer and Forster sat in a room for a month, tube fed caffine watching YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, OHMSS and SWLM on a loop. Even the pools of light conversation in the cave was visually more arresting than say the entire stealth boat climax from TND.
I could have watched Camille and Bond sulking through that exotic desert alone for a good hour.
Anyway, a good ONE star gets whacked off for all of the Bourne insecurity. FOUR stars though for this one. If Alex Witt and Stuart Baird had stayed on for this instead of the Bourne name drop, I'm sure I'd be at four and half or even five stars on this first viewing.
My initial thoughts, may add more if requested.
Admittedly, I was a bit exhausted having gotten all the negatives out that I have not written too much about the positives. Honestly though, when this film is great (which it is, 80%+ of the time), words cannot describe it for a mega Bond fan!
