25 replies to this topic

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

I'm not sure if anyone has seen this, but I thought that it was an interesting read.

http://www.firstshow...r-marc-forster/

The interesting part of this interview, IMO, is when he talks about how the action scenes involved the elements of fire, air, water, and earth.

Enjoy!

[MattofSteel]

Forster says,

"It should feel like a bullet from start to end and have me on the edge of my seat and keep it very tight, the whole film. And then I thought it would be fun to set the action sequences in four elements: fire, water, air, earth, because only in a Bond film can you do that. And I love the early Bond movies, so I wanted to do a bit of a throwback in design and even in choosing the DC-3 [airplane] and things like that, to give it a bit of a retro feel to it, but at the same time modernize MI6 and to — the smart walls and smart table and stuff like that and juxtapose it against each other. And then Daniel and I worked on sort of having an emotional tissue to the character, a little bit that is not just pure action."

And I think it describes the film perfectly. The man gets the philosophy of designing a contemporary Bond flick. Nothing about this seems like an improper approach, and I'd say his execution in these respects was exactly what he set out to accomplish. And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

One question that came to mind when I read it is this:
Are some of the action scenes intentionally put into the film just because they relate to earth, air, fire, water? Meaning, did the script for Quantum actually have a plane chase? Or did Forster put it in their to fill the "air" quality?

[MattofSteel]

Definitely an interesting idea. I have to believe it was already there at some stage, as the third act would be a bit action-light without it. But then again, who knows how much the overall story changed from the point Forster came on.

Another interesting idea from a separate article came from an MGW interview with the Toronto Star - saying that the 2nd unit did alot, but Forster was exclusively responsible for the fight vs. Slate and the Perla des las Dunas confrontation. Two scenes I considered to be, by far, the best pieces of action in the film execution-wise.

Also interesting.

[Double-Oh Agent]

Forster says,

"It should feel like a bullet from start to end and have me on the edge of my seat and keep it very tight, the whole film. And then I thought it would be fun to set the action sequences in four elements: fire, water, air, earth, because only in a Bond film can you do that. And I love the early Bond movies, so I wanted to do a bit of a throwback in design and even in choosing the DC-3 [airplane] and things like that, to give it a bit of a retro feel to it, but at the same time modernize MI6 and to — the smart walls and smart table and stuff like that and juxtapose it against each other. And then Daniel and I worked on sort of having an emotional tissue to the character, a little bit that is not just pure action."

And I think it describes the film perfectly. The man gets the philosophy of designing a contemporary Bond flick. Nothing about this seems like an improper approach, and I'd say his execution in these respects was exactly what he set out to accomplish. And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Marc Forster's quote, in and of itself, is fine and sounds good, and I personally have no problem with any of it. However, it is the end result of his execution of those quoted moments that leaves a lot to be desired in many people's minds. It's not the action sequences themselves, but how they're filmed with shaky-cam and super-quick editing that makes the action scenes tough to follow and thereby polarizing. Similarly is his decision to move and/or remove a large amount of Bondian elements (i.e. "Bond, James Bond", the sinister henchman, and the gun barrel), to create a grumpy Felix Leiter and a CIA out to kill 007, and for Bond to desecrate Rene Mathis' body, to name a few.

Had Forster reined himself in on many of these polarizing elements, there would not be the uproar that there is in fandom and elsewhere and the film would likely be more highly thought of.

[blueman]

The film is highly thought of, and I guess by enough folks for it to do blockbuster biz worldwide. At this point in Bond's career, no approach is gonna be bullet-proof, had QOS been more like say TWINE, I'd be bitching to high heaven. Different strokes.

[MattofSteel]

Forster says,

"It should feel like a bullet from start to end and have me on the edge of my seat and keep it very tight, the whole film. And then I thought it would be fun to set the action sequences in four elements: fire, water, air, earth, because only in a Bond film can you do that. And I love the early Bond movies, so I wanted to do a bit of a throwback in design and even in choosing the DC-3 [airplane] and things like that, to give it a bit of a retro feel to it, but at the same time modernize MI6 and to — the smart walls and smart table and stuff like that and juxtapose it against each other. And then Daniel and I worked on sort of having an emotional tissue to the character, a little bit that is not just pure action."

And I think it describes the film perfectly. The man gets the philosophy of designing a contemporary Bond flick. Nothing about this seems like an improper approach, and I'd say his execution in these respects was exactly what he set out to accomplish. And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Marc Forster's quote, in and of itself, is fine and sounds good, and I personally have no problem with any of it. However, it is the end result of his execution of those quoted moments that leaves a lot to be desired in many people's minds. It's not the action sequences themselves, but how they're filmed with shaky-cam and super-quick editing that makes the action scenes tough to follow and thereby polarizing. Similarly is his decision to move and/or remove a large amount of Bondian elements (i.e. "Bond, James Bond", the sinister henchman, and the gun barrel), to create a grumpy Felix Leiter and a CIA out to kill 007, and for Bond to desecrate Rene Mathis' body, to name a few.

Had Forster reined himself in on many of these polarizing elements, there would not be the uproar that there is in fandom and elsewhere and the film would likely be more highly thought of.

They shot "Bond, James Bond." It was pulled for being too artificial.

Elvis was the anti-thesis of a sinister henchman and contributes directly to the running theme behind the villains' persona. A huge breath of almost comical fresh air to the archetype.

The gun barrel was there. Quite clearly.

Felix wasn't grumpy. He was damned cool. And very honestly written, given his situation. He's not used for comic relief like he used to be on occasion.

Bond didn't desecrate Mathis whatsoever. What would you have preferred he do, leave him in the middle of the road for someone to find, thus having it get back to Quantum even more quickly that Bond was still alive? I thought Bond and Camille's dialogue after the 'desecration' made it perfectly obvious how the action was justified in terms of character.

And yeah, the camera work and editing do contribute to parts of the films failings. And I think, as you say, are responsible for a huge amount of the film's negative attention. Moreso the editing.

[HildebrandRarity]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

[Mr_Wint]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

Yea, seems like people love this film as much as they loved Die Another Day

[HildebrandRarity]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

Yea, seems like people love this film as much as they loved Die Another Day

Well, there's WAY MORE than 8 bloggers who don't rate DAD here on CBn. There's a big difference between Q0S and DAD...look at the CBn Polls.

And it's not as if Casino Royale shot the lights out at the global box office in relation to Quantum. The truth is Casino Royale made LESS money inflation-adjusted than Die Another Day in the US.

[Safari Suit]

But it sold more tickets internationally.

And, look I love QOS he says self-defensively, but more than 8 "bloggers" on this site dislike the movie. But that's OK because every movie is disliked by more than 8 people.

[Judo chop]

Back to the ‘4 elements’ comment. I think the first three are obvious.

Earth = Foot chase, specifically through catacombs
Water = Boat chase
Fire = Final showdown in burning hotel

Air = The plane chase seems to be the obvious pick to fill this slot, but I always wondered if I misread that and it was supposed to be the ‘dangling from the museum ropes’ scene that fulfilled the ‘Air’ theme? I’m not as sour on the freefall as many ‘round these parts, but I do recognize the entire sequence as feeling more than a little shoehorned. So I do harbor a small wish that the plane sequence was pulled for reasons of being in excess, and the ropes was handled a little more clearly with the editing and solely represented the element of “Air”.

I think the ropes is a much more creative approach to an air battle than the standard dogfight-and-jump sequence. They already had their air element, so why force the issue more? I feel as though the plane somewhat undermines the relevance of, and therefore a portion of the success of, the ropes sequence.

But, again, the plane doesn’t anger me in the least. It’s a small shame it’s there, but there it is and it’s a thrill and I embrace it for what it is.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

I get that the water is the boat chase, the fire is the PDLD scene at the end, and that the air is the DC-3 chase. The earth one, I'm not as sure about. It could either be the footchase in Siena, or the car chase at the beginning (don't they drive through a mine or something?).

[BoogieBond]

I quite like the Dogfight that constitutes the "Air" element action scene. Its the freefall that follows it that I think could have been better. But its still pretty good.

Of all the element action scenes the "Water" one was the most uninspiring, It would have been really cool to have a great boat chase. Oh well, theres always Bond 23 to re-explore that "Water" element

Edited by BoogieBond, 05 March 2009 - 05:42 PM.

[Double-Oh Agent]

Forster says,

"It should feel like a bullet from start to end and have me on the edge of my seat and keep it very tight, the whole film. And then I thought it would be fun to set the action sequences in four elements: fire, water, air, earth, because only in a Bond film can you do that. And I love the early Bond movies, so I wanted to do a bit of a throwback in design and even in choosing the DC-3 [airplane] and things like that, to give it a bit of a retro feel to it, but at the same time modernize MI6 and to — the smart walls and smart table and stuff like that and juxtapose it against each other. And then Daniel and I worked on sort of having an emotional tissue to the character, a little bit that is not just pure action."

And I think it describes the film perfectly. The man gets the philosophy of designing a contemporary Bond flick. Nothing about this seems like an improper approach, and I'd say his execution in these respects was exactly what he set out to accomplish. And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Marc Forster's quote, in and of itself, is fine and sounds good, and I personally have no problem with any of it. However, it is the end result of his execution of those quoted moments that leaves a lot to be desired in many people's minds. It's not the action sequences themselves, but how they're filmed with shaky-cam and super-quick editing that makes the action scenes tough to follow and thereby polarizing. Similarly is his decision to move and/or remove a large amount of Bondian elements (i.e. "Bond, James Bond", the sinister henchman, and the gun barrel), to create a grumpy Felix Leiter and a CIA out to kill 007, and for Bond to desecrate Rene Mathis' body, to name a few.

Had Forster reined himself in on many of these polarizing elements, there would not be the uproar that there is in fandom and elsewhere and the film would likely be more highly thought of.

They shot "Bond, James Bond." It was pulled for being too artificial.

Elvis was the anti-thesis of a sinister henchman and contributes directly to the running theme behind the villains' persona. A huge breath of almost comical fresh air to the archetype.

The gun barrel was there. Quite clearly.

Felix wasn't grumpy. He was damned cool. And very honestly written, given his situation. He's not used for comic relief like he used to be on occasion.

Bond didn't desecrate Mathis whatsoever. What would you have preferred he do, leave him in the middle of the road for someone to find, thus having it get back to Quantum even more quickly that Bond was still alive? I thought Bond and Camille's dialogue after the 'desecration' made it perfectly obvious how the action was justified in terms of character.

And yeah, the camera work and editing do contribute to parts of the films failings. And I think, as you say, are responsible for a huge amount of the film's negative attention. Moreso the editing.

They may have shot the "Bond...James Bond" line, but they didn't use it, so in the final film, it's missing. I still think it could have, and should have, been used.

Elvis? A "huge breath of almost comical fresh air to the archetype"? Hardly. Nowhere was his character comical in the least. Forster and company may have tried to make him that way, but sorry, they failed utterly. Instead, he's a complete waste of time and space (i.e. as a character and not his character's traits/abilities). He would have been better off being a secondary henchman rather than the main henchman.

Yes, the gun barrel was there, just moved. And in my comments, I talked about Forster and company's decision to "MOVE and/or remove" many Bondian elements.

Felix was incredibly grumpy throughout Quantum Of Solace--not without reason--but grumpy nonetheless. For much of the film he looked like he'd eaten some bad sushi. Sorry, but I didn't find him cool at all in QOS. He was cool in Casino Royale, but not QOS. His part didn't resemble the Felix Leiter character at all. They could have named his part John Smith and no one would have picked up on the difference.

Bond totally desecrates Rene Mathis' body by callously dumping him in the garbage bin--an act that is also totally out of 007's character. Whether Mathis would have minded, doesn't matter, Bond would never treat a friend's body that way. What would I have had him do? I would have had Bond lean Mathis up against the dunpster with gun in hand to make it look like he had somehow gotten the jump on the Bolivian policemen. That would have thrown the police off more than what actually transpired. The way Bond deposited the body, Mathis is clearly visible in the dumpster with his arm and leg dangling over the side so he isn't well-hidden. Consequently, the search for Bond undoubtedly begins quickly (not necessarily successfully, at least until the DC-3 purchase anyway).

[Double-Oh Agent]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

Yea, seems like people love this film as much as they loved Die Another Day

Well, there's WAY MORE than 8 bloggers who don't rate DAD here on CBn. There's a big difference between Q0S and DAD...look at the CBn Polls.

And it's not as if Casino Royale shot the lights out at the global box office in relation to Quantum. The truth is Casino Royale made LESS money inflation-adjusted than Die Another Day in the US.

I think Mr. Wint is referring to how well loved Die Another Day was on this site and elsewhere during its run in theaters, and now many of those same lovers now hold it in much less regard and are more highly critical of it today, and that he believes Quantum Of Solace will face a similar fate.

Back to the ‘4 elements’ comment. I think the first three are obvious.

Earth = Foot chase, specifically through catacombs
Water = Boat chase
Fire = Final showdown in burning hotel

Air = The plane chase seems to be the obvious pick to fill this slot, but I always wondered if I misread that and it was supposed to be the ‘dangling from the museum ropes’ scene that fulfilled the ‘Air’ theme? I’m not as sour on the freefall as many ‘round these parts, but I do recognize the entire sequence as feeling more than a little shoehorned. So I do harbor a small wish that the plane sequence was pulled for reasons of being in excess, and the ropes was handled a little more clearly with the editing and solely represented the element of “Air”.

I think the ropes is a much more creative approach to an air battle than the standard dogfight-and-jump sequence. They already had their air element, so why force the issue more? I feel as though the plane somewhat undermines the relevance of, and therefore a portion of the success of, the ropes sequence.

But, again, the plane doesn’t anger me in the least. It’s a small shame it’s there, but there it is and it’s a thrill and I embrace it for what it is.

I think the fight on the ropes in the museum is included with the Palio foot chase as it is the final part of that sequence. That, the car chase, and the knife fight with Slate are the earth sequences. The only air sequence I see is the DC-3 fight and freefall.

[blueman]

I think Mr. Wint is referring to how well loved Die Another Day was on this site and elsewhere during its run in theaters, and now many of those same lovers now hold it in much less regard and are more highly critical of it today, and that he believes Quantum Of Solace will face a similar fate.

DAD was well-loved??? Jesus it was crap when it came out and it's even more crap now. Utterly no comparison between DAD and QOS, on any playing field.

JMHO.

[Colonel Moon]

What a bull..... from a director:)

He tries to put filosophy into a Bond movie:)

[HildebrandRarity]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

Yea, seems like people love this film as much as they loved Die Another Day

Well, there's WAY MORE than 8 bloggers who don't rate DAD here on CBn. There's a big difference between Q0S and DAD...look at the CBn Polls.

And it's not as if Casino Royale shot the lights out at the global box office in relation to Quantum. The truth is Casino Royale made LESS money inflation-adjusted than Die Another Day in the US.

I think Mr. Wint is referring to how well loved Die Another Day was on this site and elsewhere during its run in theaters, and now many of those same lovers now hold it in much less regard and are more highly critical of it today, and that he believes Quantum Of Solace will face a similar fate.

Why? There's no invisable car to make Joe/Jane average groan/wince/roll eyes...there's no Bond Girl and Tsunami Surfing CGI to make them snigger...Craig was voted top action hero for 2008 whereas Brosnan was twice Damon's age in 2002 Bourne Identity. Berry's acting was sub par whereas there has yet to be a stronger 5some than Craig-Dench-Amalric-Gianinni-Kureylenko.

There's nothing but possible elevation left for Q0S from an already relatively high level. When those fans who were first introduced to James Bond via Craig join these Forum one day, Q0S will (I think) gain strength. If the only thing that a few fans can complain about is 'editing', then I can live with it because the young people who play games are used to fast paced action. These young fans (who don't post here) will replace the older ones (who do post) and Quantum will likely gain over time.

It's one of the few James Bond films which won't be ridiculed en mass and it's one of the few that does not lend itself to comedic parody.

[Colonel Moon]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

Yea, seems like people love this film as much as they loved Die Another Day

Well, there's WAY MORE than 8 bloggers who don't rate DAD here on CBn. There's a big difference between Q0S and DAD...look at the CBn Polls.

And it's not as if Casino Royale shot the lights out at the global box office in relation to Quantum. The truth is Casino Royale made LESS money inflation-adjusted than Die Another Day in the US.

I think Mr. Wint is referring to how well loved Die Another Day was on this site and elsewhere during its run in theaters, and now many of those same lovers now hold it in much less regard and are more highly critical of it today, and that he believes Quantum Of Solace will face a similar fate.

Why? There's no invisable car to make Joe/Jane average groan/wince/roll eyes...there's no Bond Girl and Tsunami Surfing CGI to make them snigger...Craig was voted top action hero for 2008 whereas Brosnan was twice Damon's age in 2002 Bourne Identity. Berry's acting was sub par whereas there has yet to be a stronger 5some than Craig-Dench-Amalric-Gianinni-Kureylenko.

There's nothing but possible elevation left for Q0S from an already relatively high level. When those fans who were first introduced to James Bond via Craig join these Forum one day, Q0S will (I think) gain strength. If the only thing that a few fans can complain about is 'editing', then I can live with it because the young people who play games are used to fast paced action. These young fans (who don't post here) will replace the older ones (who do post) and Quantum will likely gain over time.

It's one of the few James Bond films which won't be ridiculed en mass and it's one of the few that does not lend itself to comedic parody.

then this forum will die in a light speed

[Matt_13]

Thanks for posting that, cool interview.


As for the rest of the meaningless arguing that's going on, I think you guys can stop. Nothing much else to say other than some like it and others don't. Fin.

[Safari Suit]

Pretty much anything can be parodied. The works of Alfred Hitchcock are spoofed in High Anxiety. No Bond film, no matter how good or how credible, is above parody.

[Mr_Wint]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

Yea, seems like people love this film as much as they loved Die Another Day

Well, there's WAY MORE than 8 bloggers who don't rate DAD here on CBn. There's a big difference between Q0S and DAD...look at the CBn Polls.

I get a feeling that you rank the films after how many tickets they sold. So DAD should be very high on your list since it was a big box-office success.

[SAWfinger]

Similar themes were voiced in Marc Forster's onstage interview at the BFI, London, last week. See the report on the 'news' section of the James Bond International Fan Club's website, which has some detailed coverage.

[HildebrandRarity]

And yet, the film remains polarizing. Interesting.

Yea...on the one hand 80,000,000 tickets sold globally...and on the other hand 7 or 8 bloggers on CBn.

Polarizing. Yeah.

Yea, seems like people love this film as much as they loved Die Another Day

Well, there's WAY MORE than 8 bloggers who don't rate DAD here on CBn. There's a big difference between Q0S and DAD...look at the CBn Polls.

I get a feeling that you rank the films after how many tickets they sold. So DAD should be very high on your list since it was a big box-office success.

I think your feelings betray you.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

Thanks for posting that, cool interview.


As for the rest of the meaningless arguing that's going on, I think you guys can stop. Nothing much else to say other than some like it and others don't. Fin.

You're welcome!
I thought that this would be an interesting interview to talk about, so that's why I posted it. I found it interesting when Forster talks about the four elements (Unfortunately, it doesn't work for me).