401 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

Unless of course, you're REALLY saying TND became PB's best (gasp!).

He is, and he's not the only one who thinks so.

Indeed. TWINE is a bore and DAD is too cheesy for me to enjoy anymore. Goldeneye is a good film and TND is Brosnan's best, in fact they should have stuck with that formula because it worked so well.

[Mister E]

TOMMOROW NEVER DIES was just one explosion after another with dreary locations. At the very least, GOLDENEYE did better with it's story. Now speaking of preformance, Brosnan did his best job in TND as opposed to GE which is incredibly stiff.

[JimmyBond]

I won't argue that TND is mostly all action, but it's up front about it you know? TWINE tries to be this great dramatic movie and still have explosions around every corner, it fails on that level. Same with DAD, they set up a engaging storyline with Bond captured and all this and that...then we get ice palaces and invisible cars.

At least TND never tries to be anything other than it is: an action movie.

[Mister E]

I won't argue that TND is mostly all action, but it's up front about it you know? TWINE tries to be this great dramatic movie and still have explosions around every corner, it fails on that level. Same with DAD, they set up a engaging storyline with Bond captured and all this and that...then we get ice palaces and invisible cars.

At least TND never tries to be anything other than it is: an action movie.

But the action is unremarkable. Lots of explosions and gun play ? Who hasn't done that before. Also a potentially great story could have been made with great characters but again, the action ruins all of that.

Edited by Mister E, 05 September 2008 - 12:30 AM.

[Publius]

But the action is unremarkable. Lots of explosions and gun play ? Who hasn't done that before. Also a potentially great story could have been made with great characters but again, the action ruins all of that.

With the exception of the Bond-Trevelyan fight in GE and the fencing in DAD, even the vanilla action in TND is better than anything else the Brosnan era put out. I think the two best Brosnan era stories are GE and TND, while Brosnan's two best performances are TND and DAD, so only with TND do we get both. Sure, it needed work, but what we got is still great fun. It also helps that it never overstays its welcome, being the shortest Bond film since DAF.

[Mister E]

But the action is unremarkable. Lots of explosions and gun play ? Who hasn't done that before. Also a potentially great story could have been made with great characters but again, the action ruins all of that.

With the exception of the Bond-Trevelyan fight in GE and the fencing in DAD, even the vanilla action in TND is better than anything else the Brosnan era put out. I think the two best Brosnan era stories are GE and TND, while Brosnan's two best performances are TND and DAD, so only with TND do we get both. Sure, it needed work, but what we got is still great fun. It also helps that it never overstays its welcome, being the shortest Bond film since DAF.

The only action I like in TND was Bond in his BMW, everything else was meh.

[Col. Sun]

Back to the running time.

Odeon Cinemas list the film in Coming Soon and the running time is 104 mins and the cert is 12a.

[Mister Asterix]

Back to the running time.

Odeon Cinemas list the film in Coming Soon and the running time is 104 mins and the cert is 12a.

That’s a little more credible proof.

[Col. Sun]

Back to the running time.

Odeon Cinemas list the film in Coming Soon and the running time is 104 mins and the cert is 12a.

That’s a little more credible proof.

Odeon will take their info from Sony, so it seems the film IS 104 mins or at least close to that.

[DamnCoffee]

Just found this over at the ODEON website...

Quantum Of Solace (12a)
Genre: Action
Film running length: 104 min
UK release date: 31/10/2008
Directed by: Marc Forster
Country: United Kingdom
Language: English
Distributor: Sony Pictures


Who´s in it?
Daniel Craig, Dame Judi Dench


What´s the plot?

How far will Bond go?
Daniel Craig is back as James Bond in ‘Quantum of Solace’. Bond has made his latest mission personal after the love of his life, Vesper, betrayed him for a secret organisation that he and M now need to investigate.

Bond’s investigation takes him to Austria, Italy and South America, where he discovers that an important player in the secret organisation is planning to give control of South America to associates within the CIA and the British Government.

‘Quantum of Solace’ introduces the beautiful but feisty Camille, a woman with her own vendetta, who leads Bond straight to this organisation.

‘Quantum of Solace’ shows the dark side of Bond in his quest to find out more about this organisation and why the woman he loved betrayed him.

‘Quantum of Solace’ promises to provide action, adventure and cutting drama, taking the Bond genre to further heights.

‘Quantum of Solace’ – Showing at ODEON.

http://www.odeon.co....ntum_Of_Solace/

[sharpshooter]

I see. Apart from that, nothing new here. I know all that.

[DamnCoffee]

Yes. I thought I would post anyway, I always try my hardest to keep fans updated.

[crheath]

104 minutes seems an awfully short time for a Bond movie.

[Glockenspiel]

Yes. I thought I would post anyway, I always try my hardest to keep fans updated.

104 mn, it's very short, no?
At least, it'smuch "less than two hours", as M. Forster said...

[ChrissBond007]

So QOS will be the shortest Bondfilm ever! That means I would leave the cinema in lesser than two hours, intressting.

[Zorin Industries]

104 minutes seems an awfully short time for a Bond movie.

Tell that to GOLDFINGER, DR NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. Are they not good Bond films?

Why does everyone feel short changed by a running time? Less is always more in art. Bond films are no exception. Even CASINO ROYALE could have had 20 minutes shaved off (the unnecessary parkour stuff for starters...).

And I wouldn't put too much faith in anything the Odeon chain tells its over-priced public. It's a foul chain with horrendous booking policies and has been since it left the realm of cinema people and moved towards share holders. I know - because a mate has just left the company for that very reason.

[The Dove]

Eh??? How can you say the Parkour stuff was unnecessary, Zorin?? That was one of the best sequences in Casino Royale!! If anything, they could have cut down the Vesper / Bond love scenes a bit after he recovers from Le Chiffre's torture..

So as to Qos being 104 mins long, I guess I could live with it.. after all, the older Bonds like Goldfinger were about that same running time.. In any case, I'm expecting the quality of the film to matter a lot more than the quantity.

[doubler83]

So we're to definitely assume now that everything has been edited, opening titles, end credits, etc.

Locked down basically?

Oh, and the BBFC have seen it and rated it?

Or, is Odeon just taking information from the web and putting their own ideas out there?

Edited by doubler83, 05 September 2008 - 05:21 PM.

[Harmsway]

Less is always more in art.

Not true. There are definitely places where more is more.

Not to say that QUANTUM OF SOLACE should be longer. A 104 minute Bond film doesn't phase me, if it indeed is 104 minutes.

[Zorin Industries]

Eh??? How can you say the Parkour stuff was unnecessary, Zorin?? That was one of the best sequences in Casino Royale!! If anything, they could have cut down the Vesper / Bond love scenes a bit after he recovers from Le Chiffre's torture..

It was a great sequence, but completely superfluous to the narrative. And it was all repeated story wise with the Miami chase, which was more dramatic because it was furthering the plot and not just ticking the early action sequence box.

[double o ego]

The first 4 bond movies are some of the shortest in the series and yet, are widely regarded as some of the series' best. Here's hoping QoS can match that trend. The story is what counts the most and a brilliant Bond story can be told in 104mins, easily.

[deth]

and since Bond isn't art, for me more is always better when it comes to this kind of entertainment. Can't get enough Bond!

[Loomis]

Less is always more in art.

Not necessarily true. There are definitely places where more is more.

Indeed. But, as I've said before, it's not how long a film is - it's how long it feels.

One of the best films I've ever seen is EUREKA (the 2000 Japanese film, not the Nicolas Roeg film), which runs for a Jacksonian (Peter, not Michael) 217 minutes (so Mr Maltin informs me), yet I do not begrudge it its whopping running time, and neither am I even really aware of its whopping running time, because it's just so gripping and amazing. Sure, it could probably have lost quite a bit of footage and still "worked".... but some films unfold with the profundity and power of great novels, so why cut 'em?

There are many great "long" films, and there are, of course, many films that are insufferable even at a lean 80 or 90 minutes. Horses for courses. Depends on the film.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

We seem to be so used to spending over two hours in the cinema watching Bond that this relatively short running time will be a bit of a shock no doubt about it, but if the film is good enough we shouldn't feel short changed, should we?!

[Harmsway]

Less is always more in art.

Not necessarily true. There are definitely places where more is more.

Indeed. But, as I've said before, it's not how long a film is - it's how long it feels.

One of the best films I've ever seen is EUREKA (the 2000 Japanese film, not the Nicolas Roeg film), which runs for a Jacksonian (Peter, not Michael) 217 minutes (so Mr Maltin informs me), yet I do not begrudge it its whopping running time, and neither am I even really aware of its whopping running time, because it's just so gripping and amazing. Sure, it could probably have lost quite a bit of footage and still "worked".... but some films unfold with the profundity and power of great novels, so why cut 'em?

There are many great "long" films, and there are, of course, many films that are insufferable even at a lean 80 or 90 minutes. Horses for courses. Depends on the film.

[Loomis]

Oh, and the BBFC have seen it and rated it?

Doubtful, but then it's also doubtful that QUANTUM will be anything other than a 12A.

[HildebrandRarity]

I say bull[censored] to the 1h 44min run time.

Unless, of course, you add in 3-4 minutes for Main Titles and another 3-4 minutes for end titles then I *could* believe it.

Given the long shoot and huge budget and all the "character-driven" and "packed-with-action" chatter from Forster and Wilson, I find it hard to believe Q0S will be less than a 1h 50min movie.

So I say bull[censored] to ODEON.

[zencat]

1h 44min run time worries me.

[Loomis]

1h 44min run time worries me.

Why?

[[dark]]

If true, it's a far shorter film than I was expecting (even in light of Forster's comments). It worries me a bit as well, but I'll reserve judgement:

• until the final runtime has been officially announced; and
• until I have seen the film itself