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

How would you direct Quantum of Solace? What would you change?


187 replies to this topic

#1 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 02:08 PM

This is not a Quantum of Solace Bashing thread.

Please don't see this thread as an opportunity to bash Quantum of Solace, whatever you may think of it, thanks. :tdown:




_____________________________________________________________


One of the major issues I have with Quantum of Solace, is the running time. I don't know why the hell Marc Forster insisted on having a short movie. It just scratches the surface Imo.

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours, and include the following things:



Sort out the Shaky Cam.

All the fights should me more brutal. Bond should get bruised, and bloody. They should feel like they hurt. Like Casino Royale.

Show Greene's plans more, how he plans to deprive Bolivia of the water supply.

Make Mitchell, Villiers. It would've been a lot more personal.

Extend the Interrogation Sequence by around 5 minutes. Make White more menacing, have him taunt Bond over Vesper. And set up QUANTUM in more ways than just "We have people everywhere!"

Extend the scene with Bond and M in Villiers' flat and the scene in MI6. It would be revealed that Villiers was the one who sent on information to Le Chiffre, and got Mathis imprisoned.

Space out the action more. For instance, before the fight with Slate, maybe show Greene actually killing his 'best Geologist', thinking he betrayed him. Would be great to see Greene introduced there, rather than stamping paper...

See Bond sorting himself out after he kills Slate, not use quick cutting. See him stand up after killing Slate, out of breath and looking angry. A Kind of homage to the PTS fight in Casino Royale.

Have a stealth sequence, where Bond investigates the dock, and listens into Greene + Camille's conversation. Maybe Medrando's as well. I could see a great sequence with Bond on the roof, just crawling along, following Greene. No action, just stealth. Then have Bond disappear after Camille gets kidnapped. The he turns up on the bike, leading into the boat chase.

Have the boat chase as it is, just show Bond trying to interrogate Camille, avoiding gunshot's etc.

Include more scenes of Greene and Elvis, Greene especially. He had the potential to be a brilliant villain, but he's criminally underused.

Show Greene pissed off over the loss of Camille, announcing that she has to be stopped before she reveals anything. Show him planning to meet up with Quantum members at the Opera, too.

Have Bond beat up one of Greene's guards at the Opera, and steal his tuxedo. Have the scene play out in the most Bondian fashion.

Have Greene set up a meeting with White and demand to know more about 'the guy who ruined the operation', referring to Bond. White tells him how he ruined Le Chiffre's plans and lost Vesper. This allows Greene's line of "Everything he touches seems to wither and die" to have more meaning. This should happen probably after the Opera sequence.

Show more of Bond and Mathis. Extend the plane sequence, and allow Mathis explain to Bond what exactly a Quantum of Solace is.

Include a scene with Bond, Mathis and Fields walking around the street's of Bolivia, Have Fields explain how bad the poverty is, and make reference to the water shortage.

Make Greene's fundraiser the night after they arrive, and have Bond, Mathis and Fields sit down to dinner at the hotel restaurant on the evening before. This allows character development, especially for Fields. Maybe have Fields ask Bond about his past relationships, Bond goes silent.

Have a short scene with Felix, Beam and Greene. Greene saying it's a possibility that Bond will show up at the Fundraiser.

After the scene where Bond pulls Fields back down on the bed, show Bond, Fields and Mathis traveling to the fundraiser. More character development.

Show more of Felix at the fundraiser. Maybe have them talk in a secure location, Felix requesting Bond to leave for his own safety. Bond then goes up and rescues Camille.

Have Fields explain that herself and Mathis will both work on finding out about Greene's operations, as Bond and Camille go off to see The Tierra Project. This explains Bonds line, "Ms Fields showed true bravery, I want that mentioned in your report"

Show Fields and Mathis leaving the fundraiser together, arm in arm, after Bond goes off with Camille. Show both of them getting spied on from a car.

Completely cut the Free-Fall sequence, have Bond and Camille bow out of the plane, just as it touches the ground. Maybe have Bond and Camille land in the lake? Have a bloody Bond dragging out an unconscious Camille and lying her on the ground. Bond sits down, in pain?


Show Greene getting a phone call announcing that Bond and Camille are dead. Show Greene smiling creepily. Elvis asks Greene is they should get rid of the other two, referring to Mathis and Fields, Greene agrees.

Have Camille mention that her scar was caused by the house fire in her speech. Bond then goes onto talk about Greene creating a drought.

Cut to of Greene's guards walking up the stairs in the hotel. They split up, 3 head to Fields' room, 3 head to Mathis'. The scene cut to Fields, she is about to fix herself a bath. After she finishes running the water, she hears a knock on the door. She walks out of the bathroom, with a towel round her and goes to answer it. As soon as she opens the door, Greene's guards run into the room, she lets out a loud scream.

We cut to M and the Foreign Secretary here.

After Bond and Camille escape from the Sink Hole, have Bond inform a villager of the lake. It always wondered me why the miserable bastard didn't bother telling them. (If you watch the movie, you can see him considering it. "Shall I, Shall I? Shall I... NAH!)


Have Bond find Fields body before M enters the hotel room:
Something along the lines of this...

BOND walks up the stairs and along the landing, untill he comes to his hotel room. He slowly opens the door. Nothing. He walks into his room, slowly and suspiciously. His room is too quiet.

BOND: Fields?

BOND continues walking, His head turns sharply, and he walks towards the bedroom door. Once there, he takes a deep breath and opens it.

The site before him is shocking. FIELDS is on the bed, covered completely in oil. The room itself is quite tranquil. A light breeze is blowing the curtains slightly. The room doesn’t appear to be in that much of a mess. Only a few magazines and a broken lamp on the floor.

BOND runs to her aid.

BOND: NO. Fields? FIELDS!?

He checks her pulse – Nothing. He runs his hand over her face, gently, and rises up from the side of the bed. His breathing increases in anger. BOND leans out of the window, to get some air. He sees many black vehicles pull up outside, people get out of them and head in the hotel. He turns to leave, takes one last look at FIELDS, then walks out of the bedroom.

Just then, we see many armed guards enter the room, M leading them in. The Guards look around the hotel room.


After Bond escapes the guards in the elevator, Bond runs into M, she informs him that there's a capture or kill order out on him. He dodges guards and goes to Mathis' room, finding him barely alive. He catches M in the corridor and tells her to tell the CIA that she saw him leave the hotel. Allowing Bond to get Mathis out safely. Bond rings Camille, and asks her to bring the car round the back of the hotel. Camille arrives in a black SUV, not the small car in the finished movie. Bond takes the wheel, and asks Camille if they're any hospitals around. Mathis is wincing in pain in the back seat. Bond is forced off the road by some bent police officers, and Mathis is shot.

Bond cradles Mathis in his arms, and he dies. We see Bond carry Mathis into the hospital, and gently put him in the arms of a Doctor. Asking him to take care of him. Bond gets back in the car, and says that everything will soon be over, and he has a contact that can fix everything.

Bond then contacts Felix, and requests a meet. The bar scene will be longer, allowing more character development for Leiter. The action sequence is great, so I'll leave it in. Bond meets up with Camille after he escapes the bar, and explains everything.

Have a scene with M and Tanner. Tanner tells M that Mathis has died, and according to Leiter, Bond is on his way to Bolivia.

M: Get him back up, he's on to something
Tanner: But Ma'am, the CIA....
M: I don't give a B) about the CIA, or their trumped up evidence. Bond is my agent and I trust him. Leiter, besides being CIA, is one of Bonds closest friends, even though Bond doesn't know it. I trust him, too.


Have the finale play out as normal. BUT, show Bond interrogating Greene about QUANTUM.

Instead of being in the car when Camille and Bond part ways, Bond will be walking with Camille to the train station. This is due to the fact that Greene's interrogation will be in the car, I don't wish the audience to become to claustrophobic.

As Camille walks away, we see a saddened look on Bonds face, as the scene fades to Russia.

We see a scene with Bond and Yusseff, right after the original film fades out. We finally see Bond get his revenge. Whatever that may be.

The end scene plays out as normal. Bond walks off, throwing the necklace in the snow. The scene fades out, and we Crawl, End, Crawl, as the credits roll.



So guys, that's how I would direct Quantum. I deliberately moved Mathis' death to give it more emotional impact.

Before I get my head ripped off for this, may I say that I really enjoy Quantum. I just think it's a bad sequel.

Anyway, how would you change Quantum of Solace? What scenes would you add? How would you make it better, if you want to? :tdown:


Discuss.

#2 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 02:12 PM

Less is always more. And the simple and stark point of a great many points in SOLACE are sort of lost altogether here.

And if you had directed SOLACE you too would find how there is never enough time to get what you want. Artistry comes from what you have to work with, not what you would like in hindsight.

But a solid list of notions there, MHarkin. I just don't feel many of them improve, and in fact some of them are too on the nose which makes it all seem a bit lacking in substance.

#3 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 02:51 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.

I'd certainly drop the boring boat chase and all that wittering about at the docks in Haiti, along with the useless and Brosnanesque dogfight/freefall. Maybe also things like Bond's melodramatic pre-raid scene with Camille ("The training manual will tell you that the adrenaline kicks in.... you have only one shot, make it count.... blah blah blah.... bore bore bore.") If this scene in particular isn't an example of on-the-noseness™, I don't know what is. There's actually quite a bit of flab to QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

As a director, though, I'd probably make most of the same stylistic chocies as Forster.

#4 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

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

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:03 PM

Maybe also things like Bond's melodramatic pre-raid scene with Camille ("The training manual will tell you that the adrenaline kicks in.... you have only one shot, make it count.... blah blah blah.... bore bore bore.") If this scene in particular isn't an example of on-the-noseness™, I don't know what is.

You forget that it leads into the scene where Camille pleads with Bond to "make it count" as the fire rages around them; she's referring to Bond killing her, and then himself.

Before I get my head ripped off for this, may I say that I really enjoy Quantum. I just think it's a bad sequel.

*rips Mharkin's head off* B)

#5 Tybre

Tybre

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3057 posts
  • Location:Pennsylvania

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:11 PM

Maybe also things like Bond's melodramatic pre-raid scene with Camille ("The training manual will tell you that the adrenaline kicks in.... you have only one shot, make it count.... blah blah blah.... bore bore bore.") If this scene in particular isn't an example of on-the-noseness™, I don't know what is.

You forget that it leads into the scene where Camille pleads with Bond to "make it count" as the fire rages around them; she's referring to Bond killing her, and then himself.


True, but I do have to agree with Loomis somewhat. Some days when I watch the film I don't mind that moment at all, other days I'm tempted to fast forward through it as it feels like it was scripted solely for trailer voiceover or something.

#6 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:13 PM

I also wouldn't mind to see Fields explain that herself and Mathis will both work on finding out about Greene's operations, as Bond and Camille go off to see The Tierra Project. This explains Bonds line, "Ms Fields showed true bravery, I want that mentioned in your report"

After I said that Greene agrees to take out Mathis and Fields, I also added:

We cut to Greene's guards walking up the stairs in the hotel. They split up, 3 head to Fields' room, 3 head to Mathis'. The scene cuts to Fields, she is about to fix herself a bath. After she finishes running the water, she hears a knock on the door. She walks out of the bathroom, with a towel round her and goes to answer it. As soon as she opens the door, Greene's guards run into the room, she lets out a loud scream.

#7 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:23 PM

Maybe also things like Bond's melodramatic pre-raid scene with Camille ("The training manual will tell you that the adrenaline kicks in.... you have only one shot, make it count.... blah blah blah.... bore bore bore.") If this scene in particular isn't an example of on-the-noseness™, I don't know what is.

You forget that it leads into the scene where Camille pleads with Bond to "make it count" as the fire rages around them; she's referring to Bond killing her, and then himself.


I don't forget that at all. But Bond being on the point of killing Camille would be a sufficiently powerful moment without having to be the payoff for an earlier, redundant scene.

The pre-raid scene with Camille exists only as a lead-in to the scene you mention (it's otherwise completely extraneous, as well as pretty poor). But why is such a lead-in needed? I don't think it is.

#8 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:28 PM

Loomis, when did you change your opinion on QOS? I had the impression initially you liked it quite some. Have you 'overwatched' it, did a 24/7 on it to see if it holds its ground?

#9 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:29 PM

Why would Bond ask Camille if she's ever killed someone if she used to be in the Bolivian Secret Service? B)

#10 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:38 PM

Maybe also things like Bond's melodramatic pre-raid scene with Camille ("The training manual will tell you that the adrenaline kicks in.... you have only one shot, make it count.... blah blah blah.... bore bore bore.") If this scene in particular isn't an example of on-the-noseness™, I don't know what is.

You forget that it leads into the scene where Camille pleads with Bond to "make it count" as the fire rages around them; she's referring to Bond killing her, and then himself.


I don't forget that at all. But Bond being on the point of killing Camille would be a sufficiently powerful moment without having to be the payoff for an earlier, redundant scene.

The pre-raid scene with Camille exists only as a lead-in to the scene you mention (it's otherwise completely extraneous, as well as pretty poor). But why is such a lead-in needed? I don't think it is.


Just another example of Haggis's tendency for "trailer dialogue".

#11 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:44 PM

Loomis, when did you change your opinion on QOS? I had the impression initially you liked it quite some. Have you 'overwatched' it, did a 24/7 on it to see if it holds its ground?


I haven't overwatched it. I think I've seen it "only" five or six times.

While it's often the case that I change my mind about films or require a couple of viewings to "get" a film, I don't need to constantly rewatch a film to test whether it's good or bad. Yes, I liked QUANTUM OF SOLACE a lot the first time (although I felt the need to see it only once at the cinema, which is unheard of for me and a new Bond film), but the thrill wore off pretty quickly, and let's just say that it strikes me as a worse film with each viewing.

#12 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:45 PM

Why would Bond ask Camille if she's ever killed someone if she used to be in the Bolivian Secret Service? B)


Well, not all secret services indulge in killing for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Some try to avoid killing before sundown and some even refrain from killing altogether, they claim.

But I can see your point here, the Bolivian service most likely doesn't belong to that particular species... [sarcasm off]

#13 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14266 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:49 PM

An interesting sort of rewrite if one accepts the notion that a director

- is required to film the bleeding obvious
- is required to show everything and indulge a lack of imagination on the part of the gawper
- is required to do people's thinking and breathing for them

#14 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:51 PM

An interesting sort of rewrite if one accepts the notion that a director

- is required to film the bleeding obvious
- is required to show everything and indulge a lack of imagination on the part of the gawper
- is required to do people's thinking and breathing for them


The best Bond directors in my opinion have done exactly that.

#15 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:53 PM

Instead of sitting on the fence, have it personal all the way through. Instead of an action fest, have it low key and stealthy. Casino Royale really ended with this great sense of expectation. I really wanted to see Bond out for revenge, hunting down the key people responsible. All we really get is the scene at the end with Yusseff.

#16 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 23 August 2009 - 03:58 PM

Loomis, when did you change your opinion on QOS? I had the impression initially you liked it quite some. Have you 'overwatched' it, did a 24/7 on it to see if it holds its ground?


I haven't overwatched it. I think I've seen it "only" five or six times.

While it's often the case that I change my mind about films or require a couple of viewings to "get" a film, I don't need to constantly rewatch a film to test whether it's good or bad. Yes, I liked QUANTUM OF SOLACE a lot the first time (although I felt the need to see it only once at the cinema, which is unheard of for me and a new Bond film), but the thrill wore off pretty quickly, and let's just say that it strikes me as a worse film with each viewing.



Actually, this is just what I experience with many films with an alarming frequency in the last few years. The initial viewing at the cinema found me enthusiastic and awestruck, perhaps not exactly like Zencat after DAD, but still deeply impressed. But with each subsequent viewing the magic wears off more and quicker.

Perhaps that's why I tend to rewatch films not too often lately. I have the private theory that the medium isn't really made for the frequent use we have come to see as a given since VCR and DVD. Before these made any film for us more or less immediatly accessible it was rare for most people to see a film more than twice or perhaps three times (ok, 'Rocky Horror Picture Show' is one of the few exceptions). And even those viewings generally were years apart. Back then the magic of a certain film could hold its grip much longer on me.


Sorry for briefly hijacking the thread.

#17 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 04:05 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.


Hmm. But then it would be pointless. There's nothing really in there anyway, and to cut it down would make it even worse. The thing is though, I like Quantum of Solace. I only have three problems with it. The camera work, the plot and the running time.

If the camera was sorted out, and we at least had another 40 minutes added onto it, it would've been a gem of a movie. If we were in tune with Bonds emotions, it would've been even better.

Baldy should've delved deeper, IMO. Casino Royale left us wanting more, and I just don't think that Quantum of Solace delivered. It didn't give enough of anything. It's just hollow action.


Anyway, what does everyone think of my ideas? B)

#18 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 23 August 2009 - 04:19 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.


Hmm. But then it would be pointless. There's nothing really in there anyway, and to cut it down would make it even worser. The thing is though, I like Quantum of Solace. I only have three problems with it. The camera work, the plot and the running time.

If the camera was sorted out, and we at least had another 40 minutes added onto it, it would've been a gem of a movie. If we were in tune with Bonds emotions, it would've been even better.

Baldy should've delved deeper, IMO. Casino Royale left us wanting more, and I just don't think that Quantum of Solace delivered. It didn't give enough of anything. It's just hollow action.



But what's the plot of QOS, the real plot? I think it's actually quite simple and rather short. Bond tries to follow a lead to the man behind Vesper's deception. His target isn't White, isn't Green, isn't Quantum. Not really. Bond is just interested in finding Yusef. He is Bond's target. The whole affair in South America is just a bypass on his way to the guy and plotwise, characterwise perhaps the most important part would have been the talk between Bond and this man. But that wasn't shown.

#19 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 23 August 2009 - 04:22 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.


Hmm. But then it would be pointless. There's nothing really in there anyway, and to cut it down would make it even worser. The thing is though, I like Quantum of Solace. I only have three problems with it. The camera work, the plot and the running time.

If the camera was sorted out, and we at least had another 40 minutes added onto it, it would've been a gem of a movie. If we were in tune with Bonds emotions, it would've been even better.

Baldy should've delved deeper, IMO. Casino Royale left us wanting more, and I just don't think that Quantum of Solace delivered. It didn't give enough of anything. It's just hollow action.



But what's the plot of QOS, the real plot? I think it's actually quite simple and rather short. Bond tries to follow a lead to the man behind Vesper's deception. His target isn't White, isn't Green, isn't Quantum. Not really. Bond is just interested in finding Yusef. He is Bond's target. The whole affair in South America is just a bypass on his way to the guy and plotwise, characterwise perhaps the most important part would have been the talk between Bond and this man. But that wasn't shown.


Exactly, and that's my fundamental problem with it. The majority of the film feels like an unnecessary and tedious bypass in order to get to Yusef, and even when he finds him it's not very interesting.

#20 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 04:27 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.


Hmm. But then it would be pointless. There's nothing really in there anyway, and to cut it down would make it even worser. The thing is though, I like Quantum of Solace. I only have three problems with it. The camera work, the plot and the running time.

If the camera was sorted out, and we at least had another 40 minutes added onto it, it would've been a gem of a movie. If we were in tune with Bonds emotions, it would've been even better.

Baldy should've delved deeper, IMO. Casino Royale left us wanting more, and I just don't think that Quantum of Solace delivered. It didn't give enough of anything. It's just hollow action.



But what's the plot of QOS, the real plot? I think it's actually quite simple and rather short. Bond tries to follow a lead to the man behind Vesper's deception. His target isn't White, isn't Green, isn't Quantum. Not really. Bond is just interested in finding Yusef. He is Bond's target. The whole affair in South America is just a bypass on his way to the guy and plotwise, characterwise perhaps the most important part would have been the talk between Bond and this man. But that wasn't shown.


It doesn't have one. At all.

Well, it goes on about Greene creating a drought in Bolivia to take over the water supply. Even that wasn't fully explained.

I felt that they should've had a scene with Fields, explaining to Bond and Mathis how serious the water shortage is. (But still, they have a posh hotel in the center of Bolivia, but never mind.) Plus, BOLIVIA DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A B)ING DESERT! :tdown:

And do you know something, the whole film was just about Bond meeting Yusseff at the end, right at the :tdown:ING END... and they dont show the conversation they have! :)

#21 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 04:29 PM

The majority of the film feels like an unnecessary and tedious bypass in order to get to Yusef, and even when he finds him it's not very interesting.

Indeed. That fade out was so un-satisfying.

#22 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 23 August 2009 - 04:44 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.


Hmm. But then it would be pointless. There's nothing really in there anyway, and to cut it down would make it even worser. The thing is though, I like Quantum of Solace. I only have three problems with it. The camera work, the plot and the running time.

If the camera was sorted out, and we at least had another 40 minutes added onto it, it would've been a gem of a movie. If we were in tune with Bonds emotions, it would've been even better.

Baldy should've delved deeper, IMO. Casino Royale left us wanting more, and I just don't think that Quantum of Solace delivered. It didn't give enough of anything. It's just hollow action.



But what's the plot of QOS, the real plot? I think it's actually quite simple and rather short. Bond tries to follow a lead to the man behind Vesper's deception. His target isn't White, isn't Green, isn't Quantum. Not really. Bond is just interested in finding Yusef. He is Bond's target. The whole affair in South America is just a bypass on his way to the guy and plotwise, characterwise perhaps the most important part would have been the talk between Bond and this man. But that wasn't shown.


Exactly, and that's my fundamental problem with it. The majority of the film feels like an unnecessary and tedious bypass in order to get to Yusef, and even when he finds him it's not very interesting.



I think it was better to leave this crucial element in the plot to our imagination. I mean, how many options are there?

Option one: BANG
End of plot. For obvious reasons not used here.

Option two: strap the guy up, unpack your knives, needles, hooks, the whole BDSM afficionado set and surgical equipment and do the Hannibal-Lecter-rememberence ceremony.
End of plot. For obvious reasons not used here.

Option three: Talk to him. Not just 'Hey, you bloody B), you really got me angry!' More of a psychological approach like in 'The Offence' with the difference that Yusuf isn't just a suspect and survives the talk. We know he does and actually this is what I suspect happens offscreen. But showing this would have blown all boundaries of Bond's filmic universe.

I actually prefer the version used in QOS, although one wonders what could have been...

#23 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 04:47 PM

Well it's not 1 or 2, considering he walks out virtually unharmed. Anyway, I think it sucks that the key plot point crossover from Casino Royale is reduced to our imagination.

#24 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 05:03 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.


Hmm. But then it would be pointless. There's nothing really in there anyway, and to cut it down would make it even worse.


I don't think so. The things I mention are unnecessary anyway, so I'm not just cutting for the sake of it. I genuinely feel that there's some dead weight to QUANTUM OF SOLACE. But if you mean what you say when you remark that "there's nothing really in there anyway", would it really be a loss to have 90 minutes of it rather than 108 minutes?

If the camera was sorted out, and we at least had another 40 minutes added onto it, it would've been a gem of a movie.


If we'd had another 40 minutes of brilliant material, then, possibly, yes, we might have had a gem of a movie.

But in responding to this thread, I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of Marc Forster working with the script as it stood. And so my instinct is to cut and streamline, to make a shorter but faster-paced and harder-hitting film. I'm assuming for the sake of this discussion that the money and time for further script rewrites, locations and so on are not on the table and that I must work with what I've got.

#25 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 05:06 PM

When I said "there's nothing really in there anyway" I didn't mean literally. It's just that, I feel, Forster only scraped the surface with Quantum of Solace. It should've gone deeper, much deeper. But alas, it didn't. Take the drought in Bolivia for example, if we had around 10 minutes focused on that like Fields talking to Bond about the Water Shortage or Greene clearly explaining what his intentions are, it would've been a lot better, Imo.


______________________________________________________________


Look guys. I don't want this to turn into an opportunity to bash Quantum of Solace. I just want this to be a nice thread, where we can talk about what things you'll all like to have been featured. If you like it how it is, then that's fine. If you aren't to keen on the movie, and you wish to comment on what you would've wanted to have been improved, discuss it here. B)

#26 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 23 August 2009 - 05:08 PM

If I were director, I would firstly bump the movie too around 2 1/2 hours


Gawd, no. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is not too short (although everyone seems to think it is), but too long. It needs trimming down to become the "lean, mean bullet of a film" its admirers appear to believe it already is.


Hmm. But then it would be pointless. There's nothing really in there anyway, and to cut it down would make it even worse.


I don't think so. The things I mention are unnecessary anyway, so I'm not just cutting for the sake of it. I genuinely feel that there's some dead weight to QUANTUM OF SOLACE. But if you mean what you say when you remark that "there's nothing really in there anyway", would it really be a loss to have 90 minutes of it rather than 108 minutes?

If the camera was sorted out, and we at least had another 40 minutes added onto it, it would've been a gem of a movie.


If we'd had another 40 minutes of brilliant material, then, possibly, yes, we might have had a gem of a movie.

But in responding to this thread, I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of Marc Forster working with the script as it stood. And so my instinct is to cut and streamline, to make a shorter but faster-paced and harder-hitting film. I'm assuming for the sake of this discussion that the money and time for further script rewrites, locations and so on are not on the table and that I must work with what I've got.


I actually find myself supporting your cuts of the dogfight. That one really was neither necessary nor particularly impressive.


When I said "there's nothing really in there anyway" I didn't mean literally. It's just that, I feel, Forster only scraped the surface with Quantum of Solace. It should've gone deeper, much deeper. But alas, it didn't. Take the drought in Bolivia for example, if we had around 10 minutes focused on that like Fields talking to Bond about the Water Shortage or Greene clearly explaining what his intentions are, it would've been a lot better, Imo.


I'm not sure about too much of an explanatory approach here. I really don't think QOS has an overly complicated plot. If you delve in too deep with all kinds of dialogue explanations here you're running the risk of coming across as regarding your audience simply as dim. Yes, it could of course have been clearer. But all that would have got us is scenes with terribly contrived dialogue where you immediatly think 'Oh, that one was done for my benefit. Because they think I'm too dumb to get it.' And the oftener one sees the film the angrier one gets about such parts.

#27 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 05:17 PM

Look guys. I don't want this to turn into an opportunity to bash Quantum of Solace. I just want this to be a nice thread, where we can talk about what things you'll all like to have been featured. If you like it how it is, then that's fine. If you aren't to keen on the movie, and you wish to comment on what you would've wanted to have been improved, discuss it here. B)


I actually think this thread is quite valuable. It's forced me to consider what's really wrong with QUANTUM OF SOLACE, and I've concluded that it's the script. Forster's direction (despite what a lot of fans think) isn't the real problem, indeed one might even say that his sense of style elevates the film above its messy and undernourished screenplay. No, the script is the fatal flaw, no question.

#28 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 23 August 2009 - 05:23 PM

I also wouldn't mind to see Fields explain that herself and Mathis will both work on finding out about Greene's operations, as Bond and Camille go off to see The Tierra Project. This explains Bonds line, "Ms Fields showed true bravery, I want that mentioned in your report"

After I said that Greene agrees to take out Mathis and Fields, I also added:

We cut to Greene's guards walking up the stairs in the hotel. They split up, 3 head to Fields' room, 3 head to Mathis'. The scene cuts to Fields, she is about to fix herself a bath. After she finishes running the water, she hears a knock on the door. She walks out of the bathroom, with a towel round her and goes to answer it. As soon as she opens the door, Greene's guards run into the room, she lets out a loud scream.

But that is all there MHarkin. As are a great many things you suggest. Just because they haven't been put onscreen in an ABC fashion doesn't mean that we cannot get from A to C without showing B. We have seen this 20 times before in a Bond film. We don't need such scenes over and over.

And on a creative point alone...FIELDS 'running a bath" is redundant. It is not necessary and certainly not in a film that needs the scene of M running a bath a lot more and follows ROYALE with some pivotal emtional scenes set under a running shower. THAT's where a good director knows a scene such as FIELDS running a bath is neither necessary or - more importantly - progressive to the narrative.

Well it's not 1 or 2, considering he walks out virtually unharmed. Anyway, I think it sucks that the key plot point crossover from Casino Royale is reduced to our imagination.

The best films don't spoonfeed the audience what they can work out themselves. Do we need to see who put the horse's head in the bed in THE GODFATHER? Do we need to be told what CITIZEN KANE's Rosebud is in the first reel...?

#29 Mr_Wint

Mr_Wint

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2406 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 23 August 2009 - 05:39 PM

In most Bondfilms, even if I don't like them, I can still see some potential. As an example, the previous five films are all jam-packed with interesting plot elements, characters or action scenes that could have been fleshed out more. Maybe it is just small, small, things in an otherwise dire film, but they are still there. In that case, it is easy to suggest some changes.

When it comes to QOS, I have no idea. For the first time since LTK I am completely apathetic to what is going on. I would wipe the slate clean and start all over again.

#30 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 23 August 2009 - 05:40 PM

No, the script is the fatal flaw, no question.


Oh, most definitely. I do think Forster is partly to blame though. The guy really cannot do action, and the way it turned out, it looks like he was trying to hard because he wasn't comfortable with it. It would've been a lot better if he worked on the emotional side of things, and allowed 2nd Unit to work on the action. The only time when Forster 'gets it right' is probably in the PTS and the Opera Sequence. That's all.

I keep saying this, but I really wouldn't have minded to see QUANTUM OF SOLACE delayed until May 2009. Allowing producers to get the script finished. Imo, a movie is in great trouble when there's still major re-writes going on during filming.