1 reply to this topic

[thanasis]

Have seen the film twice and have to say that i enjoyed it more the second time, nevertheless QOS is a bond film that tries the extraordinary and fails with the basics.

The badly shot and edited action scenes, for me was the biggest let down, given the film's focus on action. The truth is though that for all their potential these scenes are shot with a new flair, a different approach and embarassing similarity to the second Bourne film, so as to be rendered pointless.
What i mean to say is that, the fast editing coupled with the annoyingly close shots, that are literally zoomed into Daniel's armpit or shoved on to his shoulders, turn the action into irritating sequences that if you were at home would fast forward. It is a pity that with all the history the bond films have for classic, gripping and memorable chases, we have been served a tasteless take on Bourne supremacy style action (only not as good).

A chase needs sense of direction, where the characters are heading from a to b and a feel for the location, both of which are thrown out of the window with the inexplicably fast editing and close up shots. You have no idea of where the chase is going and literally would prefer it to end sooner rather than later (the opera scene being an exception).

In my personal view, the producers need to return to classic bond chases in the mould of the TWINE and LALD boat chases, the CR foot chase and the OHMSS ski chase. These films set the standard that has been used successfully by many other films notably Ronin, Enemy of the State MI2 and the Bourne Identity.

Am i correct in thinking that Chris Corbould was not involved in this film? His absence is evident in the action department. Simon Crane was a good influence that was missed as well i believe.

Action aside, the film is quite interesting. I enjoyed Daniel Craig who keeps the film going with a sturdy performance that cements him as one of the best Bonds. Excellent delivery of his lines and great screen presence render him a joy to watch.

Marc Forster adds some interesting touches with artistic shots and a focus on putting life into the locations by using the natives and blending them in the story. I am not sure he did the best of jobs in narrating, as the storyline feels rushed and lacks any sort of build up. The tension though, is constantly present and Bond's rage is well portrayed.

Finally i liked the Bond girls who gave the film extra value, with several laughs and some good dialogue. Olga Kurylenko's character was particularly a highlight.

All in all, the film was a departure from the Bond formula, which is a brave decision to take. The films has a unique style which in some ways works but in others like the action fails.
For the next film perhaps the producers need to return to the basics that rendered the Bond films classics, as this was not a bad Bond film, it just could have been a lot better.

[Mr_Wint]

In my personal view, the producers need to return to classic bond chases in the mould of the TWINE and LALD boat chases, the CR foot chase and the OHMSS ski chase. These films set the standard that has been used successfully by many other films notably Ronin, Enemy of the State MI2 and the Bourne Identity.

I feel that Bondfilms works best when they have a grand, sweeping feel. And of course, that includes the action. Wide and long camera shots is the way to go. More Spielberg, less Michael Bay.