229 replies to this topic

[bondrules]

What ? CR is one of the three great 007 movies, the others being FRWL and OHMSS. It's good enough wre finally saw a movie that could stand beyond those two in our lifetime.

TB has to be up there.

Yup, and The Spy Who Loved Me, Goldfinger and Dr. No.

Agree, those are all topnotch best-of-the-breed....TSWLM is Rog's best movie along with FYEO

Edited by bondrules, 28 October 2008 - 09:47 PM.

[Marketto007]

I seriously worried about all those negative reviews, but I'm sure I'LL LOVE QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

xxx

[ForMathis]

very well written and detailed review/analysis of the film. Best read AFTER you have seen the movie as intended.

The detail is important in these type of review/analysis's but not good for those of us yet to see the film.

For those wh odotn want to read it, it has the same basic criticisms of all the negative reviews (and some of the positive ones):

underwritten and poorly developed characters
confusing convoluted plot
bad editing/ camera work

it also makes a number of convincing comparisons to DAD and claims that this film is just as bad as that one just more 'gritty'... and following the grit trend doesn't make a film good.

[DamnCoffee]

I seriously worried about all those negative reviews, but I'm sure I'LL LOVE QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

xxx

I agree, I'm going to just think as Quantum of Solace as like a Saw movie - you won't get it utill you've seen the one before.

[Royal Dalton]

It certainly does seem to be a "Marmite" film, as others have said.

[Safari Suit]

How many Bond movies has Rye actually liked? He strikes me as the kind that only likes FRWL, OHMSS, and CR; maybe stretching to TB, FYEO and TLD if he's feeling really naughty. Nothing wrong with that of course, but it's not the camp I'm in.

Regarding Marmite I used to think it was marketing BS, but I think you really do either love or hate it.

[bond 16.05.72]

As it stands, I think this will be Craig's last.

I understand you've seen the film already stamper and managed to infect nearly every QOS review thread with your opinion but please, QOS is more than likely to be a big BO sucess and comments like this really undermine your argument.

I'll come back and eat huumble pie if Craig quits after QOS but your doom mongering is getting a little ridiculous, I get you were disappointed with the film but predicting Craig will be booted or quit is hysterical nonsence.

I'll so glad by Friday cause at least I'll be able to see if you were right or if your way off the mark, right now I can't trust a single review and I won't read the Rye one until I've seen the film.

It's the fear of the unknown and that I'm not really sure what kind of Bond film I'm going to see, it's kind of exciting and also frightening at the same time.

[Harmsway]

I'll come back and eat huumble pie if Craig quits after QOS but your doom mongering is getting a little ridiculous, I get you were disappointed with the film but predicting Craig will be booted or quit is hysterical nonsence.

Especially since review after review has continually praised Craig. I don't think we'll see him step down at all. We might see a change in direction (a BOND 23 that's more lighthearted, perhaps), but Craig pull out? No way.

[Mr_Wint]

What ? CR is one of the three great 007 movies, the others being FRWL and OHMSS. It's good enough we finally saw a movie that could stand near to those two in our lifetime.

Wow. I'm impressed that you, with your 'exquisite' taste, have found 3 Bondmovies that you actually like.

[CM007]

Best review of the Movie yet and for once a reviewer who.A)is doesn´t appease to the masses Cough Empire Cough b who gave an honest review unlike some who are in denial....

[DamnCoffee]

Well.. if the editing is so fast and confusing, I do hope Dame Judi doesn't have a seizure at the premiere!

[Cody]

Now that I've had the entire movie laid out for me, the only thing I'm unsure about at this point

Spoiler

is the killing of the two random cops.

Other than that, from the range of reviews it sounds like the ranking of the film will mainly depend on whether the individual viewer can keep up with the plot and how they feel about the handling of the characters. Not even this 1/10 review conveys a simple Bad Movie to me, but that the issues are something you have to see and judge for yourself.

[ForMathis]

I hope there will be a third, Craig has even said hes okay with there being submarine bases and more comedy elements.

There is no reason to get rid of Craig, just make his next few stand-alone Bond movies.

The "who won the lottery" line is great. Craigs bond still has potential, and there is no reason to get rid of him. They just need NEW better writers who can create a strong narrative.

And a director who can handle both character AND action without having to riff on Bourne.

[Mr_Wint]

I hope there will be a third, Craig has even said hes okay with there being submarine bases and more comedy elements.

There is no reason to get rid of Craig, just make his next few stand-alone Bond movies.

The "who won the lottery" line is great. Craigs bond still has potential, and there is no reason to get rid of him. They just need NEW better writers who can create a strong narrative.

And a director who can handle both character AND action without having to riff on Bourne.

They need a good solid script and a hardcore, old-fashioned, action-director. That's my recipe.

[HildebrandRarity]

I disagree with Graham that Casino Royale was a 10/10. Chances are i'll disagree with him that Q0S is a 1/10. Even my least favourite Bond films come in at 5.5 or 6.

I couldn't give a flying what he thinks. I respect my own opinion and reserve judgement until I see the film.

[jaguar007]

Although I won't read the review until after I see the movie, my expectations keep getting lowered (this is probably a good thing). I hope Stamper is wrong about this being Craig's last Bond film. Dalton all over again. Every time one of Brosnan's movies came out, I kept wishing it was still Dalton. I think Craig makes an awesome Bond and really want to see him continue.

THis reminds me a little of LTK. I LOVED TLD (one of my top 5) and was very dissapointed when I saw LTK. However after several repeat viewings the movie increasingly grew on me (I still have problems with the made for TV like look of the film, but like just about everything else...except the ending).

[EyesOnly]

Did LTK get similar reviews? If so, is it safe to say that portraying this "type" of bond just doesn't jive?

Edited by EyesOnly, 28 October 2008 - 09:45 PM.

[Jet Set Willy]

I've outlined on another forum that it looks as though for Bond 23, EON will have to go back to the drawing board again, and rediscover the magic that was CR.

Actually, it's not that difficult. It's quite simple. Go back to Fleming. Babs has mentioned she would love to have Fleming back again, yet there is still loads of material unused from the books.

YOLT and TMWTGG. These two novels in there entirety have never even been touched. We could have Bond start out on a mission in Japan (or wherever) and to find the Big Man behind Quantum hiding in his castle of death. Bond enters, slays the dragon within, loses his memory, is brainwashed by terrorists to kill M, and is then reprogrammed and sent on an impossible mission to track down the worlds most deadly assasin and...well, for those of you who know TMWTGG novel, the story carries on from there - as a 100% faithful adaptation (just like CR).

There you go EON. Not difficult. It ain't rocket science. Go back to these 2 novels for Bond 23. It worked for CR.

And while we are at it, there is still plenty of material from other novels too -

MR - the entire book (ignoring MR the film, and the pathetic, loose attempt in DAD).

DAF - the majority of this novel has never been touched.

TSWLM - the entire novel has never been touched (there again, the most you could nick from this one is the character Viv Michel - the damsel in distress in a motel, the 2 great characters Horror and Sluggsy, and Bond coming to the rescue).

Quite a lot of untouched Fleming there, don't you think....

[Scamp]

Graham Rye is a respected "voice" in the Bond community etc etc. That said, he has been wrong in the past I am sure and he is neither unbiased nor unopinionated in his views on ALL things Bond. He IS not every Bond fan and cannot speak or think for every Bond fan. It is his magazine and as the editor can say what he likes, and am sure he does. It is HIS opinion and he is entitled to it. Elsewhere I have commented on what I thought, and that is MY opinion. Unfortunately, he has now not left much to peoples's imaginations in terms of the plot etc, which is unfortunate, but as I commented elsewhere..... watch it yourselves, make up your own minds and don't fret....it really is still a James Bond film and there are Bond things in it and he does bond things and he is becoming Bond!

It's an evolving "bigger picture"!

[DR76]

It does not matter whether the critics loved it or hated it, it is still up to each of us, individually, to determine our own feelings about the movie. Do not allow a film critic to sway your opinion, one way or the other.

[DamnCoffee]

Graham Rye is a respected "voice" in the Bond community etc etc. That said, he has been wrong in the past I am sure and he is neither unbiased nor unopinionated in his views on ALL things Bond. He IS not every Bond fan and cannot speak or think for every Bond fan. It is his magazine and as the editor can say what he likes, and am sure he does. It is HIS opinion and he is entitled to it. Elsewhere I have commented on what I thought, and that is MY opinion. Unfortunately, he has now not left much to peoples's imaginations in terms of the plot etc, which is unfortunate, but as I commented elsewhere..... watch it yourselves, make up your own minds and don't fret....it really is still a James Bond film and there are Bond things in it and he does bond things and he is becoming Bond!

It's an evolving "bigger picture"!

Great post.

[Royal Dalton]

I hope there will be a third, Craig has even said hes okay with there being submarine bases and more comedy elements.

There is no reason to get rid of Craig, just make his next few stand-alone Bond movies.

The "who won the lottery" line is great. Craigs bond still has potential, and there is no reason to get rid of him. They just need NEW better writers who can create a strong narrative.

And a director who can handle both character AND action without having to riff on Bourne.

They need a good solid script and a hardcore, old-fashioned, action-director. That's my recipe.

Now that the Vesper storyline's out of the way, I think the next one will be more of a traditional Bond film.

Personally, I'd like them to take a bit more more of a fantastical approach to the plots and villains, as well. It's not as though Fleming's books didn't have them.

Although I won't read the review until after I see the movie, my expectations keep getting lowered (this is probably a good thing). I hope Stamper is wrong about this being Craig's last Bond film. Dalton all over again. Every time one of Brosnan's movies came out, I kept wishing it was still Dalton. I think Craig makes an awesome Bond and really want to see him continue.

THis reminds me a little of LTK. I LOVED TLD (one of my top 5) and was very dissapointed when I saw LTK. However after several repeat viewings the movie increasingly grew on me (I still have problems with the made for TV like look of the film, but like just about everything else...except the ending).

It does feel a bit like that. But I'm sure Craig's safe in the role.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

I'm a little worried too. But, anyway, it can't be as bad as Die Another Day or A View to a Kill. Graham's exaggerating, I think.

[Qwerty]

Yikes.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

Division is good, however, when a movie endangers the franchise, it as to be told. I remember Graham review of DAD, and this one is very similar, only worse. He has an even worse view of the movie than I have.

It's not that it's less good than CR. It's that they have gone back to TND/DAD nonsense. That's what he says in essence and some remarks he make on things that bypassed me like the DAD like references to the past are totally on the spot.

Watching the CR supplements where they affirm that after DAD they needed to stop doing stuff like that is surreal, in light of the Titanic disaster crash that is QOS. See it and come back as soon as you can to talk about it. Without making doom like prophecy, I think it's easy to tell by now that unlike CR times, we will soon be entering a zone akin to 1989-1995, where people will dispute Bond's relevancy in current times after such a dud.

CR it seems wasn't a rebirth. It was a last stand. And believe me, it doesn't bring me any joy saying it.

I feel exactly the same. It seems Wilson and Barbara can't grasp what makes Bonds special and are just happy to give the reins to anybody regardless of where they want to take the series. Whatever happened to "don't screw it up?" Whatever happened to "we only hire experienced British directors"? All through the interviews, MF strikes me as an incredibly petulant self-appointed "auteur" who doesn't care that much for the film (he was went to the interview as a favour to Sony, which confirms my suspicion the studio decided the director and not Eon, took the job to see how it was making an action film, which gives us a clue to his appraisal of the series) and generally made a lot of unnecessary changes just to show he's not making CR2.
This is the first time I feel Bond is a franchise instead of a series as virtually no key artistic member has been retained from the previous film. Why giving Lamont the boot if they wanted to pay homage to Ken Adam? MF's comments in this regard couldn't e shallower since he mentions FRWL and OHMSS among KA's contributions. He's just reading copy from the press kit!
I feel MGW is starting to get old (he talked about wanting a break before next one) and BB starting to replace him and the problem is she strikes me as a more business oriented person who'd trade lifelong fans for a quick buck. Wilson answers sound well thought, whereas her comments are very PR and rehearsed.
I'll go and see this one and I really don't expect it will be a bad movie but I'm basically expecting zero by now. I'll give'em the benefit of the doubt and I hope they'll learn the lesson and next time around they'll try to fix it but if 23 doesn't deliver I might a call it a night.

[HH007]

It does not matter whether the critics loved it or hated it, it is still up to each of us, individually, to determine our own feelings about the movie. Do not allow a film critic to sway your opinion, one way or the other.

I'll be damned, a voice of reason at last. As with any Bond movie (or any movie in general) there will be people who like it, and people who dislike it. I've seen MANY negative reviews of CR, even though highly regarded as being one of the best. Why should QoS be any different? Opinions, as they say, are like s... everybody's got one.

As for this Graham Rye... who the is he? And why are people putting so much stock in what he thinks?

[ForMathis]

I feel bad for the guy, from his Casino Royale review:

2008 can’t come quickly enough for me!

[bondrules]

Actually, it's not that difficult. It's quite simple. Go back to Fleming. Babs has mentioned she would love to have Fleming back again, yet there is still loads of material unused from the books.

I agree completely. They can even pick things here and there (all Fleming writings) merge them and create a new story stemming from untouched material.

Craig stays, that should never be in doubt, and bring back Campbell...I don't see why B23 cannot be a complete success.

Edited by bondrules, 28 October 2008 - 09:55 PM.

[Mr_Wint]

There you go EON. Not difficult. It ain't rocket science.

You make it sound easy but actually it is quite hard. In rocket science you still have some mathematical formulas that can provide some guidance, for movies there are no rules at all, it seems.

From a critic's point of view, QOS was really the Promised Land. For all the critics who liked CR, what could possibly go wrong with this one? They had Craig, Haggis and Forster. And yet, it seems like they ended up with what the critics will call an average movie. Try then to imagine how much creative work there is behind a franchise with 22 'average' films!

[bondrules]

This is one thing that still makes me scratch my head

Sony is trying to ignore rival studio chatter that this may be the costliest film ever made minute by minute: $261 million for a 105-minute movie, which comes out to almost $2.5 million per minute. (As opposed to, say, the $300M pricetag for 165-minute-long Pirates Of The Caribbean 3.) But Sony sources say that number is "off base by more than 60. Plus we have tax credits from filming."

http://www.deadlineh...of-solace-cost/

Edited by bondrules, 28 October 2008 - 10:05 PM.