Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

SPOILER: Greene in the...


36 replies to this topic

#31 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 13 November 2008 - 12:48 PM

Pacino was just rumor, but you have to admit, the 25mn opening pre-credits was true (Foster butchered it in the editing), as for the YOLT review, it's an open debate... at least, I have arguments, which is better than your insults, which you people send right and left to whomever was disappointed by QOS.

Why have a 25 minute pre credits sequence that was part of the tail end of the previous film? It doesn't make sense. And the producers have noted this last week that the latter two Brosnan efforts saw them in a creative rut. Why repeat one of the most blatant examples of that (i.e. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH's over-long and unnecessary boat chase - the Bilbao sequence should have been all we saw) in QUANTUM OF SOLACE?

Stamper - in a rare moment of Zorin civility...I would say that no-one is attacking your stance on not liking QUANTUM OF SOLACE. That is completely your choice. But to clutch at every straw as well as bending a few in order to fit your opinions is letting you down.

#32 sorking

sorking

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:03 PM

Pacino was just rumor, but you have to admit, the 25mn opening pre-credits was true (Foster butchered it in the editing), as for the YOLT review, it's an open debate... at least, I have arguments, which is better than your insults, which you people send right and left to whomever was disappointed by QOS.


I apologize if my remarks were hostile or offensive, Stamper. It´s just that you really want people to believe that the imdb-review was not fake but written after having seen the so-called original version of QOS.

In an open debate I expect solid arguments. You only base yours on your hate for the finished film and a review that has proven to be wrong, again and again.

Now you even state that Forster butchered a 25 minute opening.

Let´s be reasonable. The first cut always is the director´s cut.

If it really were true that the imdb-review had been accurate, then you should at least argue that Forster had to cut his 25 minute opening chase, on the producer´s or the studio´s behalf after the alleged imdb-review-screening.

But maybe you can see how ridiculous this is: from a complicated and expensive chase sequence on location for which enough material has been filmed only one fifth will be used in the final film?

Hard to believe that EON would want SONY to shell out the money only to say later on: Sorry, guys, we only need five minutes of it. That´s not what a quality producer like EON works like.

The only explanation why the chase sequence originally could have been longer would be this: After the stunt accidents EON decided (for economical reasons) not to return to it and to ask Forster to cut the sequence from the limited material that they already had.


Aside from anything else, the chase is a consistent piece of action - shot follows shot, event follows event, the geography all ties together. All vehicles introduced at the start of the chase are accounted for by the end, every turn taken is seen coming and taken. There's no glaring gap where, say, another 15 minutes of driving around introducing, evading and destroying cars/helicopters/henchmen would fit in.

Aside from anything else these things are planned for continuity - and you only need to look at the specific damage to the lead vehicle (and its many doubles) to see that every important bit of damage is accounted for. Which means that in this mythical 15 minutes ABSOLUTELY NOTHING happened of any significance whatsoever.

Not likely, is it?

#33 Captain Tightpants

Captain Tightpants

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4755 posts
  • Location::noitacoL

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:23 PM

Why have a 25 minute pre credits sequence that was part of the tail end of the previous film? It doesn't make sense. And the producers have noted this last week that the latter two Brosnan efforts saw them in a creative rut. Why repeat one of the most blatant examples of that (i.e. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH's over-long and unnecessary boat chase - the Bilbao sequence should have been all we saw) in QUANTUM OF SOLACE?

Just as an aside, that was the original plan: the PTS segued into the main titles after Bond retrieved the money, and picked up the film again from the London scenes. Footage of Bond driving the DB5 north to Scotland were included to bridge London with their northern neighbours, but were ultimately cut. I believe Michael Apted was not happy with the end result.

#34 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 13 November 2008 - 04:44 PM

I believe Michael Apted was not happy with the end result.

As it turns out, a lot was trimmed from the MI6 scene in TWINE, including a line from Sir Robert King that would have called back to Bond's earlier statement to the Swiss banker and have had it make sense storywise. :(

#35 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 13 November 2008 - 04:46 PM

Also the guy described the last original shot of the movie at the preview he saw, which is exactly the last shot of Bond walking away from M looking at us (it's just shortened from his description). Since this shot wasn't available anywhere to see until the film release, it adds more credit to his review being genuine.

We saw that shot early on, from the original B-roll footage.

#36 Gobi-1

Gobi-1

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1529 posts
  • Location:East Texas

Posted 15 November 2008 - 07:28 AM

Yeah. White is definately higher up than we originally thought. I think he will turn out to be the head.


I hope so as well.

#37 Brooky

Brooky

    Cadet

  • Crew
  • 17 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 03:22 PM

I do not know why we neede that scene at the end when M told Bond that Greene had been shot, wouldn't it have been better to simply assume that he had died of dehydration in the desert, it certainly sounds a more painful death.