343 replies to this topic

[iexpectu2die]

My god, I'm getting terribly scared.

[Mr. Blofeld]

My god, I'm getting terribly scared.

Exactly my sentiments...

[doubler83]

Maybe a script review will relieve our fears.

[delfloria]

I hate long pre credit sequences because they throw the films out of balance. Now I am really worried, unless the climax is going to top it.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Maybe a script review will relieve our fears.

Hope springs eternal.

[coco1997]

I hope to God that EON knows what they're doing...

It almost seems that, at least to me, that now CASINO ROYALE may just have been a film that was made in order to get the fanbase back on board with the franchise after DAD. Now that they have us back, it's back to business as usual.

Like Octopussy after FYEO...

Nope. The difference is that "Octopussy" was a fantastic film.

Sigh. Alright everyone, don't lose faith yet. This could still turn out to be a quality film. However, I have a feeling that we won't be getting titles, which, quite frankly, is fine by me. I mean, as tdalton said, what would be the point of having titles after thirty minutes of film? That's like waiting for 1/4 of the movie to pass before we are introduced to the cast and crew through the credits. If they are specifically going out of their way to devise a PTS so long and elaborate, then the best idea would be to just ditch the titles altogether.

Edited by coco1997, 09 March 2008 - 09:06 PM.

[DamnCoffee]

I'm starting to get 'the feeling' aswell.

[doubler83]

Invisible car alert...

[stamper]

Titles at the end, 7mn long... now, that I would applaud !

[Mr. Blofeld]

Titles at the end, 7mn long... now, that I would applaud !

Presumably, with girls in the margins...

[Royal Dalton]

I don't know why anybody wouldn't be expecting this to be another Brosnan-type film.

Despite the hype, things didn't change that dramatically from Brosnan to Craig. How much Fleming material actually was there in Casino Royale? Less than a quarter of the film, probably (and half of that was changed from the book).

Much of the rest of it could have slotted comfortably into any of the Brosnan films, IMO. And I'm not expecting anything different this time around, either (with the exception of better production values).

These days I just follow the production, and hope for the best. But I certainly don't expect to see a great film at the end of it. That path only leads to disappointment.

[Qwerty]

A 30 minute PTS? Forster said that he's aiming at a total running time of exactly 2 hours. That would make the PTS a quarter of the entire film.

My thoughts as well. The main titles would almost be acting as some mid-storyline interlude at that point.

[MkB]

Wow... I didn't expect my remarks about the Quick News would give birth to so many desperate reactions!
Maybe it would be better to start another thread about this PTS length / apprehensions etc., and merge it with the last posts here?
If a mod could see to that, thanks in advance!

[Mr. Blofeld]

A 30 minute PTS? Forster said that he's aiming at a total running time of exactly 2 hours. That would make the PTS a quarter of the entire film.

My thoughts as well. The main titles would almost be acting as some mid-storyline interlude at that point.

Similar to Casino Royale's, where they showed Bond getting his 007 status confirmed by M.

[tdalton]

I don't know why anybody wouldn't be expecting this to be another Brosnan-type film.

Despite the hype, things didn't change that dramatically from Brosnan to Craig. How much Fleming material actually was there in Casino Royale? Less than a quarter of the film, probably (and half of that was changed from the book).

Much of the rest of it could have slotted comfortably into any of the Brosnan films, IMO. And I'm not expecting anything different this time around, either (with the exception of better production values).

These days I just follow the production, and hope for the best. But I certainly don't expect to see a great film at the end of it. That path only leads to disappointment.

Agreed. Not much changed from Brosnan to Craig in terms of the style of the films. Craig is a much better actor, IMO, and it showed in the character driven scenes in CASINO ROYALE. The only problem will be, though, that he won't get much of a chance to act in QUANTUM OF SOLACE if it's wall to wall action as it appears to be. When you're free falling from a plane or involved in a boat chase (or whatever else they have planned, I can't remember the countless action scenes we've heard about thus far), there's not much opportunity to actually act. It sounds from what we've hears so far about this film, that they might as well have just made CASINO ROYALE into Brosnan's fifth and final outing, and made that the swan song for the franchise.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Not much changed from Brosnan to Craig in terms of the style of the films. Craig is a much better actor, IMO, and it showed in the character driven scenes in CASINO ROYALE. The only problem will be, though, that he won't get much of a chance to act in QUANTUM OF SOLACE if it's wall to wall action as it appears to be. When you're free falling from a plane or involved in a boat chase (or whatever else they have planned, I can't remember the countless action scenes we've heard about thus far), there's not much opportunity to actually act. It sounds from what we've hears so far about this film, that they might as well have just made CASINO ROYALE into Brosnan's fifth and final outing, and made that the swan song for the franchise.

But, then the ending would make no sense...

[Major Tallon]

It seems to me that there's way too much footage still to be shot before the film is finished, and way too long to go before the film is released, for fans to be getting this upset about the movie. Let's face it, the Bond films are action/ adventure movies. There's going to be adventurous action. The Bond films are thrillers. There are going to be thrills. For people who want to see Daniel Craig in a carefully nuanced character study with very little by way of "action distraction," it's possible to rent "Sylvia," and it's an excellent film. But worrying this much at this early stage that there'll be too much action is a recipe for unnecessary ulcers and sleepless nights. I trust the filmmakers, and that's what I suggest the rest of us do as well.

You would think they'd cast a blonde Vladimir Putin lookalike wearing an ugly shirt as James Bond.

[Tiin007]

While I'm trying to listen to Major Tallon's sound advice, I still have a nagging feeling that the producers, after the critical and financial success of Casino Royale, are overconfident. Consequently, they are not putting in the same amount of effort as they did with Casino Royale. I sure hope that I'm wrong, though.

[tdalton]

Not much changed from Brosnan to Craig in terms of the style of the films. Craig is a much better actor, IMO, and it showed in the character driven scenes in CASINO ROYALE. The only problem will be, though, that he won't get much of a chance to act in QUANTUM OF SOLACE if it's wall to wall action as it appears to be. When you're free falling from a plane or involved in a boat chase (or whatever else they have planned, I can't remember the countless action scenes we've heard about thus far), there's not much opportunity to actually act. It sounds from what we've hears so far about this film, that they might as well have just made CASINO ROYALE into Brosnan's fifth and final outing, and made that the swan song for the franchise.

But, then the ending would make no sense...

They would have had to change the ending somewhat, but I think that CASINO ROYALE would have been a good way to end things with Brosnan in the role, and let the franchise just ride out into the sunset rather than trying to compete with the RAMBO and DIE HARD franchises in terms of being king of the over the top action spectacles.

[Gobi-1]

Judging by some of the reactions here you'd think tabloids were meant to be taken absolutely seriously.

[Colossus]

Not much changed from Brosnan to Craig in terms of the style of the films. Craig is a much better actor, IMO, and it showed in the character driven scenes in CASINO ROYALE. The only problem will be, though, that he won't get much of a chance to act in QUANTUM OF SOLACE if it's wall to wall action as it appears to be. When you're free falling from a plane or involved in a boat chase (or whatever else they have planned, I can't remember the countless action scenes we've heard about thus far), there's not much opportunity to actually act. It sounds from what we've hears so far about this film, that they might as well have just made CASINO ROYALE into Brosnan's fifth and final outing, and made that the swan song for the franchise.

But, then the ending would make no sense...

They would have had to change the ending somewhat, but I think that CASINO ROYALE would have been a good way to end things with Brosnan in the role, and let the franchise just ride out into the sunset rather than trying to compete with the RAMBO and DIE HARD franchises in terms of being king of the over the top action spectacles.

I agree with you guys on not setting expectations too high for this one or else it will be just dissapointment. And they might as well just have had Brosnan do CR. Another thing is like mentioned Babs and Wilson are too prone to influence, from the recent Die Hard 4, and Bourne Ultimatum success they will just ride that high (rooftop chase anyone??). I say just lay back and pretend it's a Brosnan movie without the orbiting satellite and you'll be fine.

[Vauxhall]

Judging by some of the reactions here you'd think tabloids were meant to be taken absolutely seriously.

Absolutely. Most of their content is pure fabrication.

I'd love to have seen the reaction to the apparent content of action scenes in CASINO ROYALE if they had simply been listed as so:

• pursuit through a cricket stadium by Bond in pre-title sequence (ultimately cut)
• violent fight in the bathroom of the aforementioned cricket stadium
• parkour foot chase across construction site in Madagascar
• fight and consequent explosion within embassy building
• Bond lands in a seaplane in The Bahamas (I remember some people considered this to be an "action sequence" when news from CASINO ROYALE was emerging)
• pursuit through an airport terminal in Miami
• oil tanker chase across Miami airport tarmac
• stairwell fight in casino in Montenegro
• car pursuit between Bond and Le Chiffre's men and resultant crash
• Bond pursues Vesper through narrow streets of Venice
• fight with Gettler and his men in derelict Venetian building

I have extrapolated certain scenes to exaggerate my point, but specific action scenes we have heard about may comprise the same set-piece within the movie (for instance, I'm expecting the jet-plane and parachute sequences to be combined). Therefore I see no need to be unduly concerned yet. We are all under informed on the subject of the content of QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Let's all be worried when we actually have a valid cause to be.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Whew! And I was getting worried...

[kneelbeforezod]

Judging by some of the reactions here you'd think tabloids were meant to be taken absolutely seriously.

We are all under informed on the subject of the content of QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Let's all be worried when we actually have a valid cause to be.

I just find it totally baffling how some people latch onto certain things like a newspaper article that sounds like total bull, and then LEAP to such depressing conclusions. It's really odd. How anyone can look at the facts in the cold light of day and conclude that we're going to get another Brosnan style film is beyond me.

And this talk of "twice the action" is surely just a producer selling his movie. Wasn't someone else quoted as saying there was a bit more, or roughly the same amount of action as CR?

[Germanlady]

Judging by some of the reactions here you'd think tabloids were meant to be taken absolutely seriously.

We are all under informed on the subject of the content of QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Let's all be worried when we actually have a valid cause to be.

I just find it totally baffling how some people latch onto certain things like a newspaper article that sounds like total bull, and then LEAP to such depressing conclusions. It's really odd. How anyone can look at the facts in the cold light of day and conclude that we're going to get another Brosnan style film is beyond me.

And this talk of "twice the action" is surely just a producer selling his movie. Wasn't someone else quoted as saying there was a bit more, or roughly the same amount of action as CR?

Someone else was DC - it has the same amount, IF not more...

[stamper]

I just find it totally baffling how some people latch onto certain things like a newspaper article

In these days of internet, it's all we have to chomp on, and the producers knows perfectly that. That's why they should have a team concentrating on the information being given to the public and it's nature, not having everyone going ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION

So far, we didn't heard anything else but ACTION. This is not about the report being bogus or not, it's about all info on this movie being ACTION. My money's is that unlike the action in CR, which defined character, this one will have the talky scenes totally disconnected to the action, which probably will be as stupid as the DIE HARD 4 action where you can cut whole scenes like the jet plane scene, without disrupting the narrative of the movie. TND was also that way, amongst other horrific Bond movies.

[Jim]

So far, we didn't heard anything else but ACTION. This is not about the report being bogus or not, it's about all info on this movie being ACTION.

Or that at this stage of the production they are concentrating on filming the action as it will probably require more post-production work and editing time than the dialogue scenes.

[AngryPolarBear]

My money's is that unlike the action in CR, which defined character, this one will have the talky scenes totally disconnected to the action, which probably will be as stupid as the DIE HARD 4 action where you can cut whole scenes like the jet plane scene, without disrupting the narrative of the movie. TND was also that way, amongst other horrific Bond movies.

I think you're taking it to far when you start comparing it with Die Hard 4. That movie was way too action packed even for a Die Hard movie. Yes, CR will have some spectacular action, but I'm confident it will have a good story that drives the characters and doesn't make the action pointless.

Marc Forster wasn't especially fond of the Brosnan era, but liked CR because it was humanized. Why go and make QoS if it's gonna go back to those films? And the very talented Haggis isn't just sitting around making a "seen-it-before" action movie screenplay.

I still believe in this movie.

[stamper]

Then let them have the press chomp on something else than amazing ACTION. I'm beginning to think this movie will be called ACTION 007 in non english speaking countries

[sharpshooter]

A lot of action, done correctly, can be thrilling and exciting. Just like the free running , stairwell and collapsing building sequences in CR.

I just hope they get all the sequences strong, and their isn't a scene like the tanker chase. I didn't like that much. Just a bit too overlong and repetitive.