82 replies to this topic

[Mr_Wint]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal so what difference does this scene make?

[Jim]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal

Is that meaningful criticism of a James Bond film, though?

[The Shark]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal

Is that meaningful criticism of a James Bond film, though?

Depends which James Bond film...

[Jim]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal

Is that meaningful criticism of a James Bond film, though?

Depends which James Bond film...

Serious question, though - is it worth shaking the stick of pointlessness and lack of originality at the Bond films?

Personally I revel in their pointlessness and lack of originality.

[jrcjohnny99]

I didnt have a problem with the scene, tho like many in the movie, I thought Forster could've handled it better;
QoS is for me, the most erratic Bond pic, at times it's marvellous, at others, dull and trivial...

[The Shark]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal

Is that meaningful criticism of a James Bond film, though?

Depends which James Bond film...

Serious question, though - is it worth shaking the stick of pointlessness and lack of originality at the Bond films?

Personally I revel in their pointlessness and lack of originality.

Really? That's why I dislike 60% of Bond films.

[byline]

Enjoy wasting your lives on pointless BS babble like this.

Oh, good grief, if you don't like the discussion, fine. That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But that doesn't make it a universal truth for everyone else on the planet. Some of us actually enjoy discussing various plot points, even multiple times. And we don't consider it "wasting [our] lives." If we did, then we wouldn't join in the discussion, eh?

[Mr_Wint]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal

Is that meaningful criticism of a James Bond film, though?

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal

Is that meaningful criticism of a James Bond film, though?

Depends which James Bond film...

Serious question, though - is it worth shaking the stick of pointlessness and lack of originality at the Bond films?

Personally I revel in their pointlessness and lack of originality.

If a film serves as sheer escapism and succeed at it, I wouldn't call the film pointless. Obviously, I don't think the majority of Bondfilms are pointless. If I did I wouldn't be a fan. Moreover, I don't watch Bondfilms to get a dose of unoriginality. On the contrary I want and expect the same ingenuity now as we once had during the Connery/Moore era. But what on earth will people remember from QOS? Is there any scene, any character, any performance, plot-twist or even a tiny bit of dialogue that anyone will bother to homage in 20-30 years?

[Sark2.0]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal so what difference does this scene make?

thats odd considering that one of the biggest criticisms of QoS was that it deviated too far from the other films.

[The Shark]

The whole film was pointless and unoriginal so what difference does this scene make?

thats odd considering that one of the biggest criticisms of QoS was that it deviated too far from the other films.

One can still deviate from the Bond formula and have plenty of trivial homages, and can also be unoriginal, from a Bourne perspective.

Edited by The Shark, 03 January 2010 - 04:48 AM.

[agentjamesbond007]

I just think that they don't make good Bond movies anymore

[Jeao007]

There were far more homages in Die Another Day than there ware in Quantum of Solace. The only obvious reference was the oil fields scene. Other than that, I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Well, DAD certainly has the good manners to chuck all its "homages" into the scenes around Q's lab.

QOS on the other hand, er, artisticly weaves them into the film's narrative.

The doorless car at the end of the pretitles referencing AVTAK?

The bodyguard falling off the roof AFTER BEING CLIPPED OFF BOND'S TIE!!!! I'm sure there's somthing similar in TSWLM...

From the same film, the walk from the desert, Bond in a suit, his leading lady in a black evening dress?

The freefall? All that's missing is Rog's blazer... and better filming, of course.

They're just from the top of my head.

I think you're looking into it a bit too much..

[St. John Smythe]

So, what would you (by which I mean the people who didn't enjoy it) have preferred? It's one thing to say you hate it, but what alternative death would you have enjoyed?

Personally, I thought it was fine. I enjoyed the callback to Goldfinger, especially since oil is the new gold. Unless you're crybaby/insane/psycho Glenn Beck, in which case gold is the new cash. It's been almost 50 freaking years since the first Bond movie, so I enjoy any thrill and homage that we hardcore fans can find in the latest films.

Edited by St. John Smythe, 03 January 2010 - 08:58 AM.

[volante]

The Bond formula was there, in so much as every new film is bang up to the minute (and sometimes a couple of years ahead of its time)
DAD had cars with gimicks and scenes of unbeliveable action, just like the early films.
If eveytime we have a lazor are we going to think of GF
cricky, that would mean 007 never wearing a tux again!!! or never saying Bond James Bond, oh but then he didn't say it in QOS (so was it good or bad?)

I went to see QOS twice at the cinema, I bought the DVD and will buy the ultimate addition.

We will continue to talk about Fields and Craig's blond hair right up to the rumour mill kicking off for no 23

I for one, take what I can from QOS and not wanting to wait for 23, I put my thoughts down constructively in fan fic (then get critisized for not writing in the style of Fleming.

If you don't like the new stuff, put one of Roger's movies on this afternoon.
Raise an eybrow, and have simulated sex.

[Angel of Death]

i thought it was better than goldfinger's scene actually.

[ChristopherZ22]

Fields covered in oil is the worst homage or reference to a previous film. Of course it is nowhere near as interesting as Jill Masterson covered in gold paint. How could it have been? The scene is an enormously huge embarrassment.

The Bond producers (Michael and Babs) need to stop the homages or references. It makes the series look tiresome, the makers desperate for money and to cling to the past, and it sends a wrong message that the new films are lesser in quality than the older pictures. It is like Wilson and Babs are saying, "if we could make films like we did in the 60s, they would be much better than the junk we are making now."

Personally, I don't think the new films are as good as the older ones. The world would be a better place if every copy of Quantum of Solace was burned; but that is beside my point. The producers should not be saying to the public that they miss the old days and cannot make great Bond films anymore by putting homages in every film.

[Zorin Industries]

Fields covered in oil is the worst homage or reference to a previous film. Of course it is nowhere near as interesting as Jill Masterson covered in gold paint. How could it have been? The scene is an enormously huge embarrassment.

The Bond producers (Michael and Babs) need to stop the homages or references. It makes the series look tiresome, the makers desperate for money and to cling to the past, and it sends a wrong message that the new films are lesser in quality than the older pictures. It is like Wilson and Babs are saying, "if we could make films like we did in the 60s, they would be much better than the junk we are making now."

Personally, I don't think the new films are as good as the older ones. The world would be a better place if every copy of Quantum of Solace was burned; but that is beside my point. The producers should not be saying to the public that they miss the old days and cannot make great Bond films anymore by putting homages in every film.

But Bond is a franchise that has been self-aware since day one (janitors whistling the GOLDFINGER tune, Sylvia Trench returning etc). You could argue that the returning M office scene alone is a nod to the formula.

Homages or nods to what went before are entirely creative choices. And why did so many people harp on about the lack of the gunbarrel when putting that at the start of SOLACE would have been as much about homaging the past as any oil covered agent lying like Ms Eaton. Yet EVERYONE seems to want that one repeated time and time again. I personally don't see FIELDS oily grave as a direct homage to GOLDFINGER (though the intent is blatant on that front) but more in keeping with the production design of black and white and the notions of chess and oneupmanship that play out throughout SOLACE and really come into play in those hotel scenes.

And I hate to say it, but after 50 years of film making I think Eon Productions can sort of do exactly what they want with their films. Oh, and the producers are not "desperate to make money". You can trust me on that.

[Publius]

I was actually surprised by how well the "oil girl" scene was done and how important they made it to the narrative. Maybe I'm showing my age, but I was never wowed by the "golden girl" scene and have always imagined it was something that left most of its impact on movie screens in 1964.

[byline]

I was actually surprised by how well the "oil girl" scene was done and how important they made it to the narrative. Maybe I'm showing my age, but I was never wowed by the "golden girl" scene and have always imagined it was something that left most of its impact on movie screens in 1964.

FWIW, I remember watching this movie with my sister on TV when we were kids. Of course, I was just a little kid at the time, but I was completely fascinated, and a bit creeped out, by the notion that someone could be spray-painted to death. Since then, we've discovered that it's really not a viable way to kill someone, but it certainly left its mark on my imagination.

[Judo chop]

I was actually surprised by how well the "oil girl" scene was done and how important they made it to the narrative.

Agreed. In terms of how the scene was filmed, I think of all the Forsterness that shows up in the film, this scene is where it shines the brightest.

Of course, I was just a little kid at the time, but I was completely fascinated, and a bit creeped out, by the notion that someone could be spray-painted to death. Since then, we've discovered that it's really not a viable way to kill someone, but it certainly left its mark on my imagination.

Same here.

[Vauxhall]

You know what really pissed me off about QoS was that they copied alot off of other bond movies. Such as Goldfinger, when the girl was covered in gold paint, and a few other scenes. Idk if that was on purpose or not but i didn't like it.

I expect so. It would be a remarkable coincidence if not.

[Publius]

FWIW, I remember watching this movie with my sister on TV when we were kids. Of course, I was just a little kid at the time, but I was completely fascinated, and a bit creeped out, by the notion that someone could be spray-painted to death. Since then, we've discovered that it's really not a viable way to kill someone, but it certainly left its mark on my imagination.

I envy you, because that scene just screams classic cinematic moment. Without the awe factor, there isn't enough underlying substance for me to be taken aback by it. This is not a criticism of Goldfinger, mind you, just a comment on how different its aims were than those of QOS.

[Captain Tightpants]

That entire "golden girl" scene from goldfinger was pointlessly used in QOS. Why was it ever filmed for a rebooted Bond series? What was the reason for it?.Why did we need to be reminded that we were watching a Bond movie?

That scene completely kills the movie, very unoriginal and dour. If there were any way of redoing that scene I would really wish the film makers would maybe for the foreseeabale director's cut bluray or even perhaps just omit it.

What do you think?

Actually, to me, it's the golden girl scene that kills GOLDFINGER. It's simply not possible. Painting Jill Masterson would have taken hours, by which time she would have known something was up. Likewise, the blow that knows Bond out would have to have put him out for so long that he would need urgent medical attention. QUANTUM OF SOLACE's oil girl sequence is far more realistic, even if there is suspiciously little crude oil on the sheets or floor.

[Guy Haines]

That entire "golden girl" scene from goldfinger was pointlessly used in QOS. Why was it ever filmed for a rebooted Bond series? What was the reason for it?.Why did we need to be reminded that we were watching a Bond movie?

That scene completely kills the movie, very unoriginal and dour. If there were any way of redoing that scene I would really wish the film makers would maybe for the foreseeabale director's cut bluray or even perhaps just omit it.

What do you think?

Actually, to me, it's the golden girl scene that kills GOLDFINGER. It's simply not possible. Painting Jill Masterson would have taken hours, by which time she would have known something was up. Likewise, the blow that knows Bond out would have to have put him out for so long that he would need urgent medical attention. QUANTUM OF SOLACE's oil girl sequence is far more realistic, even if there is suspiciously little crude oil on the sheets or floor.

If you think too much about it, neither scene was that realistic. The points made above about the GF scene are valid. But what about Miss Fields in QoS? Did the villains kidnap her, drown her and dump the body back in the hotel room, or call 'round to that room and drown her on site? Either way, the smell of crude oil would have attracted attention, surely?

The GF scene worked, for me at least, because its obvious who the victim of the crime is - even covered in gold paint you could see it was Jill Masterton. A shocking discovery for the audience as she was very much alive in the previous scene. The sense of shock in the QoS homage scene isn't there. The body splayed out on the bed in QoS covered in black crude oil could have been that of any young woman, although of course it could only, really, have been Miss Fields.

[The Shark]

That entire "golden girl" scene from goldfinger was pointlessly used in QOS. Why was it ever filmed for a rebooted Bond series? What was the reason for it?.Why did we need to be reminded that we were watching a Bond movie?

That scene completely kills the movie, very unoriginal and dour. If there were any way of redoing that scene I would really wish the film makers would maybe for the foreseeabale director's cut bluray or even perhaps just omit it.

What do you think?

Actually, to me, it's the golden girl scene that kills GOLDFINGER. It's simply not possible. Painting Jill Masterson would have taken hours, by which time she would have known something was up. Likewise, the blow that knows Bond out would have to have put him out for so long that he would need urgent medical attention. QUANTUM OF SOLACE's oil girl sequence is far more realistic, even if there is suspiciously little crude oil on the sheets or floor.

I think the implication in GF, is that Jill was unconscious (Odd Jobb possibly knocked her out, or came at her with chloroform) when she was painted, and the whole job was done relatively quickly, with big brushes.

[BrozFan]

I thought the scene was great. Quite chilling in its effect.

I only wish I hadn't seen the spoiler images before the film was released - it definately ruined the impact for this viewer.

[Cabainus]

Isn't it more the case though that when you have a series spanning, 22 films, you are going to get scenes that vaguely resemeble those from previous films?

[Guy Haines]

I thought the scene was great. Quite chilling in its effect.

I only wish I hadn't seen the spoiler images before the film was released - it definately ruined the impact for this viewer.

About the spoiler images - "splashed" all over the weekend newspapers in the UK a week before the film's opening - yes, they ruined the impact. That said, the actress herself revealed months before that Miss Fields came to a "sticky end" in the movie. Reading that, it wasn't hard to work out that the character would end up dead and it would probably involve some unpleasant substance.

[The Shark]

Isn't it more the case though that when you have a series spanning, 22 films, you are going to get scenes that vaguely resemeble those from previous films?

This is far more than an accidental resemblance, it's obviously a deliberate nod. Particularly when you look at the behind the scenes photos of them comparing the two shots.

[DaveBond21]

I've only just discovered this thread, and I must say I am quite surprised that this wasn't brought up earlier.

I like the scene, but I think it's amazing they decided to pay homage to such a famous scene. Using the name Robert Sterling is one thing, but having an oily version of one of the most famous moments in the series is another.

The only thing I don't like about the scene is how quickly it comes after we've only just met Fields; as we were just starting to really like her.