197 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

This is a franchise that, during the 70s and 80s, some mainstream critics thought was worthless yet there are entries during those decades that I rank among my personal favourites in the series. How some of you have remained fans of Bond pre-CR when reviews of the previous films have ranged from average to middle of the road at best is sometimes beyond me.

Well, it may surprise you to know that my favourite Bond film is THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, which I also genuinely believe to be one of the best in the series. I'm also a huge MOONRAKER fan and like A VIEW TO A KILL, so rest assured that I do make up my own mind on things.

I've no idea how I'll react to QUANTUM OF SOLACE. I've spoken to someone who's seen it and I must say that everything he had to say about it made me feel that it's going to be very much my cup of tea. After he'd filled me in on the film I remarked that the way he'd described it made me feel that it was what a Wong Kar Wai Bond outing would be like.

I may love QUANTUM. I may not. It may be that I'll find it a mixed bag. Time will tell.

[MarkA]

Well, it may surprise you to know that my favourite Bond film is THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, which I also genuinely believe to be one of the best in the series. I'm also a huge MOONRAKER fan and like A VIEW TO A KILL, so rest assured that I do make up my own mind on things.

Well I sure wouldn't want you to recommend a film to me

[Loomis]

Oh dear.
....

What, specifically, is it that he says that's got you all sad, my old friend?

Basically, he thinks the film is incoherent and uninvolving, that it's just action without any dramatic resonance and that the story and characterisation are so slapdash that it's impossible to care about the movie or the people in it. Those aren't his exact words, but it's the gist of his opinions. Also, he can't understand why a director like Forster was chosen for this film. He thinks Craig, Forster and Haggis are fine dramatic artists whose talents have been completely wasted.

For what it's worth, it seems that he loves Craig as Bond and is a huge CASINO ROYALE fan. But he thinks QUANTUM is a damp squib of a followup, and incredibly messy and hard to follow to boot.

[HildebrandRarity]

Oh dear.
....

What, specifically, is it that he says that's got you all sad, my old friend?

Basically, he thinks the film is incoherent and uninvolving, that it's just action without any dramatic resonance and that the story and characterisation are so slapdash that it's impossible to care about the movie or the people in it. Those aren't his exact words, but it's the gist of his opinions. Also, he can't understand why a director like Forster was chosen for this film. He thinks Craig, Forster and Haggis are fine dramatic artists whose talents have been completely wasted.

For what it's worth, it seems that he loves Craig as Bond and is a huge CASINO ROYALE fan. But he thinks QUANTUM is a damp squib of a followup, and incredibly messy and hard to follow to boot.

But will his opinion ruin the percentage score on Rottentomatoes?

I have a bet in place on my end that Q0S goes north of 85 percent fresh.

Another thing is that I don't think most reviewers are intelligent enough to follow plot lines that are beyond ordinary and require serious thought. Perhaps he doesn't have the mental capacity required of this film.

What was TWINE review like back in October 1999?

[Loomis]

Perhaps he doesn't have the mental capacity required of this film.

I think he does. Also, he's well known for liking cult, "offbeat", "arty" and generally non-mainstream fare. A bad review from Kermode is a bad sign, IMO.

[Royal Dalton]

I love this review. Kermode looks like he's about to explode!

[bondrules]

I love this review. Kermode looks like he's about to explode!

Me too. He is so focused and passionate. I can't wait to find out if I agree with him or not, but he makes a very good argument.

[HildebrandRarity]

Perhaps he doesn't have the mental capacity required of this film.

I think he does. Also, he's well known for liking cult, "offbeat", "arty" and generally non-mainstream fare. A bad review from Kermode is a bad sign, IMO.

What about the rave reviews from The Hollywood Reporter, Variety, Empire and Total Film? They don't count? Are their raves a bad sign too?

Since when was a James Bond film "arty", "off beat", "cult" and "non-mainstream"? Obviously this guy was the wrong guy to review Q0S because it is not arty, culty, off-beaty or non-mainstreamy.

It feels as if you've already thrown in the towel and have been influenced negatively by this review. Subconsciously, you're dead meat...even if Q0S turns out to be 91 or 92 percent fresh on the Tomatometer.

[timmyv123]

To be honest my only concern is if theirs much dialogue in it thats actually relevant to the whole vesper storyline? Marc, daniel etc say he gets his quantum of solace and questions his motives for killing people after he himself lost someone etc etc, reviews like this don't mention any of this and thats my concern. Personally the action looks fantastic and I can't wait to see it but i hope it supplies the answers.

As for mark kermode, to be honest I didn't like listening to him regardless to what he says, he's almost shouting it at you and sticking it down your throat!

[Royal Dalton]

Since when was a James Bond film "arty", "off beat", "cult" and "non-mainstream"? Obviously this guy was the wrong guy to review Q0S because it is not arty, culty, off-beaty or non-mainstreamy.

He likes mainstream films, too. Just not this one.

[trevanian]

I don't think I know this Kermode guy's work. Are we talking a UK equivalent to Harlan Ellison's film criticism? (as in: coming from somebody who knows what he is talking about and loves what he loves and brutalizes mercilessly what doesn't work.)

[MarkA]

See I just tend to agree with him. He was right on the money for me with Munich (what a bore). Also, and he has said this many times before. OHMSS is his favorite Bond despite George Lazenby. Kim Newman is a pretty good critic too, (both understand genre cinema) so maybe QOS really polarizes. Wait and see. It's just talking to many at Pinewood last Sunday who had seen it, there was a general air of disappointment.

Edited by MarkA, 24 October 2008 - 10:19 PM.

[HildebrandRarity]

Since when was a James Bond film "arty", "off beat", "cult" and "non-mainstream"? Obviously this guy was the wrong guy to review Q0S because it is not arty, culty, off-beaty or non-mainstreamy.

He likes mainstream films, too. Just not this one.

Fine.

But honestly, I don't care.

From what others have said, Craig is awsome in the role, Arnold's score is the best of his five, the action is ball-breakingly unbeatable, the locations and cinematography are sumptious...and it's riveting and vigorous enough that it won't give you time to go make a tea or a sandwich in the middle of the movie like Casino Royale does.

[Royal Dalton]

Since when was a James Bond film "arty", "off beat", "cult" and "non-mainstream"? Obviously this guy was the wrong guy to review Q0S because it is not arty, culty, off-beaty or non-mainstreamy.

He likes mainstream films, too. Just not this one.

Fine.

But honestly, I don't care.

From what others have said, Craig is awsome in the role, Arnold's score is the best of his five, the action is ball-breakingly unbeatable, the locations and cinematography are sumptious...and it's riveting and vigorous enough that it won't give you time to go make a tea or a sandwich in the middle of the movie like Casino Royale does.

But what if he's right and they're wrong?

[MarkA]

From what others have said, Craig is awsome in the role, Arnold's score is the best of his five, the action is ball-breakingly unbeatable, the locations and cinematography are sumptious...and it's riveting and vigorous enough that it won't give you time to go make a tea or a sandwich in the middle of the movie like Casino Royale does

.
Fine but you really need to see it before you make up your mind. Otherwise you might be in the unenviable position of admitting you were wrong

[kneelbeforezod]

Fine.

But honestly, I don't care.

From what others have said, Craig is awsome in the role, Arnold's score is the best of his five, the action is ball-breakingly unbeatable, the locations and cinematography are sumptious...and it's riveting and vigorous enough that it won't give you time to go make a tea or a sandwich in the middle of the movie like Casino Royale does.

Count me as someone else who finds your sudden conversion to the faith rather... odd. Suddenly you're Quantum's biggest cheerleader.

I think you're just building us all up until your ruthless panning of the film when you see it: "I've been this film's biggest supporter, I had such high hopes, but it's an utter disaster on all fronts". I bet you've already written your review

[DamnCoffee]

As Connery says in Thunderball..

"Well... you can't win 'em all!"

[sorking]

Stupid fool can't even say 'Duran Duran' right.

Durun, Durun.

It's laughable.

In some parts of the world this is known as 'a joke'.

A standard part of the Kermode repertoire - and a frankly disingenuous one - is the mispronunciation of names when he dislikes the content.

[HildebrandRarity]

Fine.

But honestly, I don't care.

From what others have said, Craig is awsome in the role, Arnold's score is the best of his five, the action is ball-breakingly unbeatable, the locations and cinematography are sumptious...and it's riveting and vigorous enough that it won't give you time to go make a tea or a sandwich in the middle of the movie like Casino Royale does.

Count me as someone else who finds your sudden conversion to the faith rather... odd. Suddenly you're Quantum's biggest cheerleader.

I think you're just building us all up until your ruthless panning of the film when you see it: "I've been this film's biggest supporter, I had such high hopes, but it's an utter disaster on all fronts". I bet you've already written your review

What do you mean? I actually started a thread in the non-spoiler Q0S section called "Why Q0S Will Be The Best James Bond Film Ever".

Where is there a sudden conversion? Look up the above thread. In fact i'll dig it up shortly.

[MattofSteel]

Ultimately Marc is the first, what I'd call "naturalistic" director the series has had. There's bound to be some polarization, and it's bound to rub some people the wrong way.

Even if the turns out to be nothing but a 2 hour thrill ride - well, yes, I think that considering Bond is played by Daniel that might be a terrible waste, but I can't begrudge the film industry for entertaining me.

[kneelbeforezod]

What do you mean? I actually started a thread in the non-spoiler Q0S section called "Why Q0S Will Be The Best James Bond Film Ever".

Where is there a sudden conversion? Look up the above thread. In fact i'll dig it up shortly.

Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word sudden, but somewhere along the way there was a conversion of sorts wasn't there? weren't you one of the most vociferous anti-Craigers at one point? Maybe I'm mixing you up with someone else

[HildebrandRarity]

Here's the BBC (fancy that!) review. Same employer, different view point.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ent/7676637.stm

Pretty positive. Non?

[Loomis]

It feels as if you've already thrown in the towel and have been influenced negatively by this review. Subconsciously, you're dead meat...

Nope.

Allow me to repost something I've written earlier in this thread:

I've no idea how I'll react to QUANTUM OF SOLACE. I've spoken to someone who's seen it and I must say that everything he had to say about it made me feel that it's going to be very much my cup of tea. After he'd filled me in on the film I remarked that the way he'd described it made me feel that it was what a Wong Kar Wai Bond outing would be like.

I may love QUANTUM. I may not. It may be that I'll find it a mixed bag. Time will tell.

My mind is open. I can't wait for QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

[Harmsway]

Here's the BBC (fancy that!) review. Same employer, different view point.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ent/7676637.stm

Pretty positive. Non?

Very positive.

[MarkA]

From what others have said, Craig is awsome in the role, Arnold's score is the best of his five, the action is ball-breakingly unbeatable, the locations and cinematography are sumptious...and it's riveting and vigorous enough that it won't give you time to go make a tea or a sandwich in the middle of the movie like Casino Royale does

.
Fine but you really need to see it before you make up your mind. Otherwise you might be in the unenviable position of admitting you were wrong

[marktmurphy]

I've never really liked Kermode and he gets a bit too het up (also is a little full of himself- thinks his fabourite film choice is unique -it's the Exorcist; never stops going on how about clever he is for liking it- also notice how many times he points out how he was 'the only one' who supported Craig at the outset etc.) however he is an intelligent chap and a good reviewer. So I can't discount his review and I imagine he has good reason for saying what he does. I don't think it'll annoy me in quite the way it has him, but I'm used to the idea that QoS just isn't a great entry into the Bond series.
Very little about this film has really caught my imagination- right from the first trailer. I think somehow its DNA is on every scene and clip: it just ain't all that.

Good that the quality of CR has made someone like Kermode this disappointed, though. If this film had been the one after DAD would anyone have been that upset?

[Harmsway]

Very little about this film has really caught my imagination- right from the first trailer. I think somehow its DNA is on every scene and clip: it just ain't all that.

Then it'll be interesting to compare notes once we've seen the film, markt, 'cause I've loved the footage I've seen from QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

[DamnCoffee]

He even goes on about Quantum of Solace having nothing relevant to the film! WHAT THE HELL...

Spoiler

Bond drops the loveknot in the snow at the end of the movie, he's gotten over Vesper, he has his QUANTUM OF SOLACE - ING IDIOT! :@

[sharpshooter]

This doesn't faze me, it seems this guy knows sweet little about QoS. The Bond fans on this site have been following this film since the start and are educated enough to know the plot and the other goings on.

As for him hating AWTD, when I first heard it, I hated it. But after repeat listens, it's a grower. If he has just heard it for the first time in the theatre, he is already behind the game.

[Col. Sun]

Kermode didn't give CR a great review, but he's now saying it was great.

He often does this; changes his tune later on after reconsidering a film.

I recall The Mist, a terrific, very scary, very bleak horror which should have done much better at the BO. Kermode was pretty dismissive of it on his first review, but about 2 weeks later on the BBC, he said he now thought it was very good.

I often find he misses things in the movies he sees and also, once he's in a slagging off swing, he can't stop himself from getting more and more negative.

However, his review here does tally with some other reviewers.