84 replies to this topic

[Jack Spang]

"I know that I am not looking forward to any future Bond film being in the style of TND. TND is one of my least favorite in the franchise, and that is primarily due to its overload of action, and anything that we may get in the future that is similar to it in terms of an overabundance of action is something that I won't be very excited at all to see. I think that we've been there and done that with the whole action-overload type of Bond film, and now that we've got a superior actor in Daniel Craig, that the more character driven type of film should be the focus of EON, not the action spectacle type of film that QUANTUM OF SOLACE appears to be wanting to be. There is plenty of time to return to that way of making films when Craig retires from the role and someone else comes in."

Agreed.

For me, even if the action is top quality, gritty and realistic (I'm not making any judgements on this jet sequence), if there is way to much of it like in the thoroughly disappointing Brosnan era, then I won't enjoy QOS a hell of alot. I don't understand Eon. QOS should have slightly less action than CR, not more! It just seems sometimes like an abundance of action is all Eon care about. It sounds like QOS will have very minimal character movement, even less than CR and we only got a little in CR. Still, this is the cinematic Bond and I think I may have finally learned not to expect to much these days. I just thought that after CR came out, they would build on what they did with characters and story seeing this was a highly successful film. Instead it sounds like they are doing the opposite. They have such a talented leading actor, writer and director - most artistic and they seem to take very little advantage of them for some reason. If QOS will be what it sounds like, a virtually non stop action film like the Brosnan flicks, then why didn't they just hire an action director? This is what happened with TWINE. They hire Apted, a dramma director and instead we get a virtually non stop action fest with a few seconds of character movement scattered here and there. I'm sure QOS will be much, much better than TWINE, but in terms of the balance of action and dialogue, it sounds like it will be much on par with this film. The general audience aren't going to pay much attention to the quality of the dialoge scenes if there is very little of them. They may just notice the absence of cheese.

I wonder if it was P & W or Haggis who dreamt up the Camille character. I don't like the sound of her. A**e kicking action girls aren't my bag.

Edited by Jack Spang, 08 March 2008 - 05:44 PM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

This is what happened with TWINE. They hire Apted, a drama director and instead we get a virtually non stop action fest with a few seconds of character movement scattered here and there. It sounds like it will be much on par with this film, and I don't like the sound of that.

That's my worry, too, I'm afraid...

[tdalton]

I just thought that after CR came out, they would build on what they did with characters and story seeing this was a highly successful film. Instead it sounds like they are doing the opposite. They have such a talented leading actor, writer and director - most artistic and they seem to take very little advantage of them for some reason. If QOS will be what it sounds like, a virtually non stop action film like the Brosnan flicks, then why didn't they just hire an action director? This is what happened with TWINE. They hire Apted, a dramma director and instead we get a virtually non stop action fest with a few seconds of character movement scattered here and there. I'm sure QOS will be much, much better than TWINE, but in terms of the balance of action and dialogue, it sounds like it will be much on par with this film. The general audience aren't going to pay much attention to the quality of the dialoge scenes if there is very little of them. They may just notice the absence of cheese.

I wonder if it was P & W or Haggis who dreamt up the Camille character. I don't like the sound of her. A**e kicking action girls aren't my bag.

Completely agreed. I would have thought that, following the success of CASINO ROYALE, that EON would have thought that people liked this new, dramatic take on the James Bond character, and would have gone a little further with that. They have something right now that they haven't had in a long time, which is both the critics and the public on their side at the same time. The general public loved CR (from what I can tell), the critics loved it, which has to make it one of the more popular entries in the series, so why not keep going down the road that they started down with this film.

I can, and will, say this however, that if QUANTUM OF SOLACE turns out to be anything like TOMORROW NEVER DIES, then I may be done with the Bond franchise. QOS turning into TND (or, even worse, TWINE) would be the biggest disappointment in the history of the franchise, even more so than not having a third Dalton film, not seeing either Sam Neill or Sean Bean in the role, or any of the countless other things I would have liked to have seen happen differently with the franchise.

Edited by tdalton, 08 March 2008 - 10:58 PM.

[medrecess]

CR had a lot of action to be honest.The opening sequence was at times unrealistic too.The key to CR success was having the right mix of good action sequences and tight story with adequate character development.CR did have good dose of action but realistic at times and unrealistic at certain times.It is a action franchise,they will always have all the big sequences.I think QOS action will be properly woven into the story.The plane landing in the desert after a chase,the car chase in italy and the boat chase too will all be entertaining but NOT over the top unlike the brosnan era.

QOS IMO is going to be the most action oriented yet realistic Bond movie till now.
An extremely gritty spy film with no action is never gonna happen here.This is James Bond afterall.

Dont worry about the overdose of action sequences.They will be woven properly into the story unlike DAD. Whats the point of paying HAggis millions if all they wanted was ty action which could be delivered by WADE and PURVIS.Since they paid milions to an oscar winner,i am sure they got a top notch script,a fact which is confirmed by Daniel craig already who said that they have a top class script and the movie could fail only if the filmakers and actors f***** up big time

Edited by medrecess, 08 March 2008 - 11:10 PM.

[tdalton]

QOS IMO is going to be the most action oriented yet realistic Bond movie till now.
An extremely gritty spy film with no action is never gonna happen here.This is James Bond afterall.

Dont worry about the overdose of action sequences.They will be woven properly into the story unlike DAD. Whats the point of paying HAggis millions if all they wanted was ty action which could be delivered by WADE and PURVIS.Since they paid milions to an oscar winner,i am sure they got a top notch script,a fact which is confirmed by

Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling for a completely action-less Bond film (although, come to think of it, that would be great, but will never happen), but it seems that every other day we're hearing about a new action sequence. This movie is only supposed to be 2 hours long, but we're hearing about action scene after action scene after action scene, and so on. IMO, the action scenes were the worst thing about CASINO ROYALE, and it was the dramatic scenes (i.e. dialogue, character development, etc.) that really shined in that film, and I would like to see more of that in the future, but there doesn't appear as though there will be as much time for that in QUANTUM OF SOLACE given all the action that they're trying to cram in there.

I do have worries about the script, though, regardless of what anyone on set is saying. It was, supposedly, handed in right before the deadline and without a polish, and even the actors have said that there were holes in it that they were able to fill in with their own stuff (I think that it was Jeffrey Wright who said this, but I'm not 100% sure).

The main point of the whole thing, to me, is that I just don't understand why a director like Marc Forster is brought in to do an action film. He's a brilliant director, yes, but I would like to see a Bond film in the style of his other films, which are smaller, simpler films than what the average Bond mega-blockbuster film is. As this appears to be wall-to-wall action, then I think that a director that's more accustomed to action is who should be sitting in the director's chair.

[medrecess]

yea i agree,with too much action time character development suffers.But then we cant expect much changes anyway.A Bond film with just 2 action sequences and great story will be amawing but its not gonna happen ever

[Leon]

This is what happened with TWINE. They hire Apted, a drama director and instead we get a virtually non stop action fest with a few seconds of character movement scattered here and there. It sounds like it will be much on par with this film, and I don't like the sound of that.

That's my worry, too, I'm afraid...

It's certainly a worry. My thoughts on TWINE need not be regurgitated, but basically I hate it as a film and as a Bond film, it's just plain awful and very badly written.

If QoS is anything like TWINE it will be a huge blow for me. I am also pretty shocked at having heard MGW say that Marc Forster will need to be given all their professional help with the action as he isn't an action director...fair enough. But then he says there will be double the action of Casino Royale.

No logic there at all. And I can plainly see that Daniel Craig shines brightest in the quiet scenes of suspense, drama and dialogue. Ok sure he's great at action but so are a lot of people, why waste talent like Daniel Craig's and Marc Forster's by building a film 15 minutes shorter than the last one with double the action??

[Mr. Blofeld]

I'm afraid; I'm very afraid...

[Matt_13]

Look, why don't we wait for at least a teaser to get a taste of what it will look like. If it turns out looking terrible, then we can start to worry, but we haven't even had a glimpse from behind Forster's camera's yet, and who knows, the action may be briefer than MGW is leading on. I trust someone like Haggis would know the right way to craft a sequel.

[sharpshooter]

Exactly.

[medrecess]

this movie will be like Bourne Ultimatum.huge amount of action sequences happening one after the other but with meaning and logic.In QOS,Bond is on the move trying to locate the people responsible and the closer he comes the more dangerous it gets.While the organisation is trying to kill him as they dont want there plan to be known.It will be a fast paced actioner.

[Jack Spang]

"No logic there at all. And I can plainly see that Daniel Craig shines brightest in the quiet scenes of suspense, drama and dialogue. Ok sure he's great at action but so are a lot of people, why waste talent like Daniel Craig's and Marc Forster's by building a film 15 minutes shorter than the last one with double the action??"


Eon seem to have a habit of doing this. They hire huge talents for just a few mere seconds of artistcally oriented scenes scattered here and there. Having such talent also generates good publicity for them. It's all PR from beginning to end. Action is clearly the most important thing to them. They like to play it safe, plain and simple. They'll never make a FRWL type Bond film again. It just aint gonna happen unless we get different producers who aren't afraid to take a bit more of a risk. Eon are scared.

Why does everyone mention the trailer? That isn't any indication of how much action the film will have as they always show mostly action in the previews. It is neither a huge indication as to the quality of the action. They merely show short clips of different action. You have to see the whole film.

You've got to wonder what the hell Craig is going on about when he says "we are making this one better" or something like that. LOL. Does "better" mean more action for the action junkies? Unless maybe he means better, retro style sets which would be cool.

I too will have given up on the Bond films if QOS is just one big long action scene. Even CR had one to many action scenes (still, CR is a good action thriller and one can't expect to much more in terms of less action and more thriller/character movement/story but QOS sounds worse). I'll still go and see the Bond films in the cinema but I will no longer give a damn about following their progress. I really won't. I'll enjoy the Bond films as hardcore action movies and no more, like Die Hard. The only action films I see are the Die Hards and Bournes because they have an interesting protagonist like James Bond. I saw I Am Legend for the first time last night and the first half is much better than the second half as the first half has less action and is more interesting. The first two Bourne films are much better than the third for this reason. Damn, too much action just gets boring! It really does, for me. What's interesting is that you got more character movement and dialogue in the first 3 Die Hard films than you did in the Brosnan Bond era. LOL. Well, it's not funny really. I don't mention the fourth Die Hard because I am yet to see it.

Oh well, atleast we have the literary Bond. I just hope IFP have more adult Bond books written!

Edited by Jack Spang, 09 March 2008 - 03:53 PM.

[AngryPolarBear]

I really don't think the four action sequences of Casino Royale was too much.

[Sir James Moloney]

"No logic there at all. And I can plainly see that Daniel Craig shines brightest in the quiet scenes of suspense, drama and dialogue. Ok sure he's great at action but so are a lot of people, why waste talent like Daniel Craig's and Marc Forster's by building a film 15 minutes shorter than the last one with double the action??"


Eon seem to have a habit of doing this. They hire huge talents for just a few mere seconds of artistcally oriented scenes scattered here and there. Having such talent also generates good publicity for them. It's all PR from beginning to end. Action is clearly the most important thing to them. They like to play it safe, plain and simple. They'll never make a FRWL type Bond film again. It just aint gonna happen unless we get different producers who aren't afraid to take a bit more of a risk. Eon are scared.

Why does everyone mention the trailer? That isn't any indication of how much action the film will have as they always show mostly action in the previews. It is neither a huge indication as to the quality of the action. They merely show short clips of different action. You have to see the whole film.

You've got to wonder what the hell Craig is going on about when he says "we are making this one better" or something like that. LOL. Does "better" mean more action for the action junkies? Unless maybe he means better, retro style sets which would be cool.

I too will have given up on the Bond films if QOS is just one big long action scene. Even CR had one to many action scenes (still, CR is a good action thriller and one can't expect to much more in terms of less action and more thriller/character movement/story but QOS sounds worse). I'll still go and see the Bond films in the cinema but I will no longer give a damn about following their progress. I really won't. I'll enjoy the Bond films as hardcore action movies and no more, like Die Hard. The only action films I see are the Die Hards and Bournes because they have an interesting protagonist like James Bond. I saw I Am Legend for the first time last night and the first half is much better than the second half as the first half has less action and is more interesting. The first two Bourne films are much better than the third for this reason. Damn, too much action just gets boring! It really does, for me. What's interesting is that you got more character movement and dialogue in the first 3 Die Hard films than you did in the Brosnan Bond era. LOL. Well, it's not funny really. I don't mention the fourth Die Hard because I am yet to see it.

Oh well, atleast we have the literary Bond. I just hope IFP have more adult Bond books written!

You

[Germanlady]

From TOTAL FILM Bond

DC: Look, we are reinventing the character, to some degree. We have to discover, what he is about. Don

[sharpshooter]

There you go. Sounds perfectly good to me.

[kneelbeforezod]

It sounds like QOS will have very minimal character movement, even less than CR and we only got a little in CR. Still, this is the cinematic Bond and I think I may have finally learned not to expect to much these days. I just thought that after CR came out, they would build on what they did with characters and story seeing this was a highly successful film. Instead it sounds like they are doing the opposite. They have such a talented leading actor, writer and director - most artistic and they seem to take very little advantage of them for some reason. If QOS will be what it sounds like, a virtually non stop action film like the Brosnan flicks, then why didn't they just hire an action director?

There is just no evidence for any of this!

If what you say comes true I'll be gutted too, but there is just no evidence for this. You can't just latch on to a producer hyping up the amount of action and then just ignore all the positives on this film.

Nobody's read a script, seen a trailer...

I'm on the fence, at the moment I'm just trusting the fact that theres a great creative team behind this film.

[marktmurphy]

So from the new set report video, it seems that Bond will be in an old DC3 aeroplane which will be chased by a Marchetti (Wilson talks of these planes being propeller planes; so I'd guess the Marchetti isn't a jet as this article says).
He also says that these are the type of aircraft a drug runner might have; so is Bond teaming up with a drug runner (in the DC3) or coming up against one?

Personally I sort of hope that Bond isn't piloting the DC3- it would just be a bit more believable if it was being flown by a pilot who knows the plane. Bond doesn't have to be in the drivers seat for an action scene to be exciting.

[stromberg]

So from the new set report video, it seems that Bond will be in an old DC3 aeroplane...

It's a Douglas C-47 Skytrain aka 'Dakota' (the military transport version of the DC-3), to be precise.
Our own Sir Roger piloted one of those in 'The Wild Geese'

[Gri007]

I am excited and also worried. If EON are taking Bond down the more realistic and down to earth approach. Then over the top action seqeunces should be avoided. A less action orientated film would be suitable.

I have said this before, but being two Bond girls in this film to me is a worry. Bond is still mourning and there for shouldn't be shagging Agent Feilds.

But we've just got to wait till October 31st.

But thinking about it. Most of us on this forum was worried about the Casino Royale "reboot" project. And that was a success. I think you've got to really love the James Bond in the Ian Fleming Novels to truly understand how great CR is and hopefully how great QOS will be.

[Harmsway]

I have said this before, but being two Bond girls in this film to me is a worry. Bond is still mourning and there for shouldn't be shagging Agent Feilds.

I always figured Bond would drown any grief he had in hedonistic activity, so I have no problem with that idea.

[iexpectu2die]

I have said this before, but being two Bond girls in this film to me is a worry. Bond is still mourning and there for shouldn't be shagging Agent Feilds.

I always figured Bond would drown any grief he had in hedonistic activity, so I have no problem with that idea.

A very true point - something that's made me rethink my own worries.

Could Fields be one of these hedonistic pursuits? And perhaps her death will leave Bond reeling in guilt. Perhaps her character isn't so shallow after all, maybe she brings Bond's broken heart even closer to home.

[GOLDFINGERGIRL]

FOUND OUT SOME MORE GREAT DETAILS TODAY ON THE ACTION IN CHIL'E
http://www.bondmovies.com/board/showthread.php?p=100763

[DamnCoffee]

Thanks for this, and welcome to CBn.

[box]The desert roads of a country altipl

[mcdonbb]

Look, why don't we wait for at least a teaser to get a taste of what it will look like. If it turns out looking terrible, then we can start to worry, but we haven't even had a glimpse from behind Forster's camera's yet, and who knows, the action may be briefer than MGW is leading on. I trust someone like Haggis would know the right way to craft a sequel.

Yeah I agree...stop damning the film. How many action sequences do we have?...lets see a free fall; dogfight; fall down stairs; fight hanging from ropes; car chase foot chase and a boat chase, but some of that crammed in a the PTS so I guess either way...

but consider CS had a foot chase; tanker chase; falling house; car chase albeit short; stairwell chase; torture sequense; one long poker game etc.

we are looking at trees and none of us I believe are prevy to the forest so lets dont burn it yet.

and hey I liked TND!!! All it aspired to be was a straight forward bond action film and it was....leave it alone! (Remember it won back bond fans and got new ones even given that dreadful GoldenEye)