96 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

I'm afraid I can't agree with you.

I felt the car chase was one of, if not the best car chase sequence in the Bond series (note I said Bond series, I'm not going to compare it to the likes of Ronin, so QoS is a close second to that one).

[dee-bee-five]

I actually thought the Pre-title was the chance for Bond to enter the lexicon of top flight car chases, it wasn't. None of the action sequences in QOS are as memorable as the Madagascan foot chase in CR or the Fire Truck or for that matter the end climax sinking house sequence. The only sequence I'll mark out is The Tosca sequence that was inspired.

It's odd how different we all are; the car chase is one of the bits of QoS I rewatch most, because I just love the way the movie uses the language of film in a thrilling couple of minutes. And much as I love CR, its action sequences, save for the opening foot chase, are the parts of it that interest me least.

[JimmyBond]

And much as I love CR, its action sequences, save for the opening foot chase, are the parts of it that interest me least.

I prefer the smaller bits of action myself. The two main action sequences in CR (African Rundown and Miami Airport) always felt like a bit of a hold over from the Brosnan days, where the action set pieces had to be these huge long affairs. I give them a bit of a pass because they serve there purpose narratively speaking, but I much prefer the smaller bursts of action QoS affords us.

[dee-bee-five]

And much as I love CR, its action sequences, save for the opening foot chase, are the parts of it that interest me least.

I prefer the smaller bits of action myself. The two main action sequences in CR (African Rundown and Miami Airport) always felt like a bit of a hold over from the Brosnan days, where the action set pieces had to be these huge long affairs. I give them a bit of a pass because they serve there purpose narratively speaking, but I much prefer the smaller bursts of action QoS affords us.

I agree. The fight in the stairwell is, for me, more thrilling than the entire Miami Airport sequence.

[DamnCoffee]

You know, after watching Casino Royale a few night ago, the whole Miami Chase has grown on me. I prefer the more personal action scenes, like the Stairwell fight, for instance.

[JimmyBond]

You know, after watching Casino Royale a few night ago, the whole Miami Chase has grown on me. I prefer the more personal action scenes, like the Stairwell fight, for instance.

Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the Miami sequence (more so than the African Rundown), more for the tailing of the bomber than the actual tanker fight though.

[DamnCoffee]

African Rundown was a drag for me, tbh. It's why Casino Royale only get's a 9/10 instead of full marks.

[Major Tallon]

I enjoy all of CR's action sequences, especially the imaginitive fluidity of the parkour chase and the pulse-pounding excitement of the Miami Airport sequence. But for me, top marks go to the stairwell fight, which is intense, bloody, and balletic.

I think that the editing in QOS diminishes somewhat a full appreciation of the action sequences, but that doesn't mean that they're ineffective. I've become particularly fond of the fight in the art gallery, especially where Bond falls headlong toward the ground, only to be snagged at the last minute by the rope around his ankle. These sequences are very good, they thrill, and they grow in my esteem as I watch them over and over, but I can't help feeling I'd enjoy them more if the editing permitted more detail to be seen with each viewing.

[Zorin Industries]

The car chase could have been a cinematic highlight but the editing just chopped it down to a blur, I know some of you worship it but I can't lie it wasn't what I wanted...

Wasn't that sort of the point? From my unfortunate experience cars crashing at fast speeds are meant to be a bit of blur. There is no point filming every Bond car chase from two static cameras in order to let the Stuntman's Union of Europe slap themselves on the back yet again to the detriment of the film and its narrative (something Vic Armstrong became a bit guilty of I'm afraid).

It's admirable that you stand by this film and your review was unequivocal love letter to QOS but I'm sorry some of us didn't feel this.

CR was a more traditional Bond film and the camera work might be pedestrian in your eyes but I'm sorry the way that car chase was shot was too fast for my eyes, you can't continue to deny that this is not an opinion which isn't in the minority.

I've defended the film to a point with friends who have not liked it but that car chase was a waste, I'm sorry I expected something like The French Connections seminal chase but QOS effort isn't nowhere in the same league. Bond films have always had ok car chases, they were impressive the first time but seem somewhat mild compared to say John Frankenhemier's epic car battle in Ronin.

I actually thought the Pre-title was the chance for Bond to enter the lexicon of top flight car chases, it wasn't. None of the action sequences in QOS are as memorable as the Madagascan foot chase in CR or the Fire Truck or for that matter the end climax sinking house sequence. The only sequence I'll mark out is The Tosca sequence that was inspired

If CR is traditional than I guess I want traditional.

Zorin Industries does not write love letters for anyone. Not even himself. And certainly not for a film. Zorin Industries prefers to judge a film - even a Bond one - on its own efforts and, because SOLACE was the one of the best directed and emotionally nuanced 007 films since 1962, that is not something to ignore.

It is not for the Bond films to enter some "lexicon" / list / Top 10 anything when it comes to car chases. That is okay for the Empire magazine readers and the viewers of Five's Stuart Maconie's Top 100 Clips Of All Time garbage (which is never a substitute for just making new television), but Bond films are not out to top lists. That is what happens to films when eleven year olds make lists (some of which still feel obliged to do so round here). And they are certainly not in the game of including narrative-neutral sequences from the likes of THE FRENCH CONNECTION (a film made nearly 40 years ago)..what is the point of that? I'd rather a sequence from SOLACE felt like a sequence from the 22nd Bond film rather than ticking boxes for cineastes.

I hate to tell you but QUANTUM OF SOLACE is actually more of a "traditional" Bond film than ROYALE. Far more so, in fact.

[Loomis]

I hate to tell you but QUANTUM OF SOLACE is actually more of a "traditional" Bond film than ROYALE. Far more so, in fact.

Agreed. And that's one of the reasons I prefer CASINO ROYALE.

[bond 16.05.72]

The plotting and othet aspects it seemed like a traditional Bond film that someone had put the fast forward button on but the camera work ceratinly wasn't!. Denying the Bourne influence is ridiculous, I caught some of Ultimatum with my Wife recently and it was so obvious.

If it was a case of only a few reviews picking up on the Bourne influence fine but nearly everyone mentioned it whether it was criticising or praising.

This is not directed at you Zorin but whats all this criticsiing the Madagassca chase sequence, everyone ( all right not everyone) loved this when it appeared first, now with QOS micro bite action it suddenly derivative of Brosnan Bond.

Yes the scale and the length but Craig's Bond firmly made this his own , Brosnan never ran that much or used that much energy in his entire tenure.

It seems as a way of giving QOS some credit we are now going to criticise the one sequence that was voted by fans and outsiders as a true highlight, you might want to bring it down becasue it's not shot so fast that your confused what the hell is going on but it easier to follow that that footchase in Sienna.

Forster and his editors may have wanted to create this effect but I guarantee one thing you won't see it shot like that again, outside of the fanbase many people were just confused by these sequences and even MGW voiced some concern, I'm not saying he didn't like it but maybe the technique was a touch to experimental for Bond. Bond films aren't made for fans they are made for mass audiences and despite it's Box Office the opinion wasn't a resounding thumbs up.

My Wife said to me it was all just too fast, maybe were both getting too old for this but alot of QOS was blur and defend that car chase all you want it won't be seen as anything memorable outside of us fans.

To me the moments I most liiked were the dialogue sequences, Bond & M, Bond & Mathis and the moments we got to see Greene deliver some great lines. The action for me apart from Tosca was not what I remember.

I liked QOS, I'll take it over most of the rest of the series bar a couple but it's probably made me realise that my days of being a big Bond fan are over, the though of watching some of the films in the series makes me wince and I can imagine a marathon is long way off, I certainly won't be doing one before Bond 23 like with CR & QOS, much better films out there to see.

[Zorin Industries]

The plotting and othet aspects it seemed like a traditional Bond film that someone had put the fast forward button on but the camera work ceratinly wasn't!. Denying the Bourne influence is ridiculous, I caught some of Ultimatum with my Wife recently and it was so obvious.

If it was a case of only a few reviews picking up on the Bourne influence fine but nearly everyone mentioned it whether it was criticising or praising.

This is not directed at you Zorin but whats all this criticsiing the Madagassca chase sequence, everyone ( all right not everyone) loved this when it appeared first, now with QOS micro bite action it suddenly derivative of Brosnan Bond.

Yes the scale and the length but Craig's Bond firmly made this his own , Brosnan never ran that much or used that much energy in his entire tenure.

It seems as a way of giving QOS some credit we are now going to criticise the one sequence that was voted by fans and outsiders as a true highlight, you might want to bring it down becasue it's not shot so fast that your confused what the hell is going on but it easier to follow that that footchase in Sienna.

Forster and his editors may have wanted to create this effect but I guarantee one thing you won't see it shot like that again, outside of the fanbase many people were just confused by these sequences and even MGW voiced some concern, I'm not saying he didn't like it but maybe the technique was a touch to experimental for Bond. Bond films aren't made for fans they are made for mass audiences and despite it's Box Office the opinion wasn't a resounding thumbs up.

My Wife said to me it was all just too fast, maybe were both getting too old for this but alot of QOS was blur and defend that car chase all you want it won't be seen as anything memorable outside of us fans.

To me the moments I most liiked were the dialogue sequences, Bond & M, Bond & Mathis and the moments we got to see Greene deliver some great lines. The action for me apart from Tosca was not what I remember.

I liked QOS, I'll take it over most of the rest of the series bar a couple but it's probably made me realise that my days of being a big Bond fan are over, the though of watching some of the films in the series makes me wince and I can imagine a marathon is long way off, I certainly won't be doing one before Bond 23 like with CR & QOS, much better films out there to see.

I personally don't mind the construction and presence of the Madagascar foot chase though it is narratively superfluous. It is not necessary to the story one bit and its connotations for BOND and the mission are done better via the Miami sequences.

To ignore the Bourne-isms of SOLACE is not ridiculous. What is more ridiculous is completely forgetting that the likes of Bourne were influenced by Bond and the 1960's so SOLACE is not really apeing Bourne but outdoing itself.

[dee-bee-five]

The plotting and othet aspects it seemed like a traditional Bond film that someone had put the fast forward button on but the camera work ceratinly wasn't!. Denying the Bourne influence is ridiculous, I caught some of Ultimatum with my Wife recently and it was so obvious.

If it was a case of only a few reviews picking up on the Bourne influence fine but nearly everyone mentioned it whether it was criticising or praising.

This is not directed at you Zorin but whats all this criticsiing the Madagassca chase sequence, everyone ( all right not everyone) loved this when it appeared first, now with QOS micro bite action it suddenly derivative of Brosnan Bond.

This is very true. When I said that CR's action sequences are the part that interest me least, I'm not saying that I don't like them. I do. Of the two, I much prefer the footchase to the airport scene. I like the Miami sequence a lot and admire and appreciate the staging. But I think the footchase is more original and, for me, the sheer speed and violence of the stairwell fight trumps them both.

Personally, I couldn't care less if QoS is or isn't like Bourne. I don't much care for the Bourne films, to be honest. The first was okay-ish but I feel the series declined rapidly after that. And I'm not sure it's fair to say Pierce Brosnan didn't run as Bond. He ran awkwardly, I'll give you that (a cross between a very bad impression of Cary Grant in North By Northwest and an overactive piston engine), but he did run...

[Sigma7]

quantum of rubbish, i dont understand how this bond movie can be annoying to watch , but it succeeds admirably.

QOS is on par with TMWTGG as the worst bond movie of the series, beating DAD and MR

[dee-bee-five]

quantum of rubbish, i dont understand how this bond movie can be annoying to watch , but it succeeds admirably.

Judging from your use of grammar (or lack of), it's no surprise to me why you failed to appreciate a grown-up Bond film.

[Sigma7]

quantum of rubbish, i dont understand how this bond movie can be annoying to watch , but it succeeds admirably.

Judging from your use of grammar (or lack of), it's no surprise to me why you failed to appreciate a grown-up Bond film.

Shhhhhhh adults are talking, go play outside

[dee-bee-five]

Shhhhhhh adults are talking, go play outside

In your case, preferably on a busy road junction...

[tim partridge]

To ignore the Bourne-isms of SOLACE is not ridiculous. What is more ridiculous is completely forgetting that the likes of Bourne were influenced by Bond and the 1960's so SOLACE is not really apeing Bourne but outdoing itself.

By hiring Greengrass' Bourne editor and second unit director to do it for them?

I really like QOS, but I think denying the Bourne influence is really, really grasping at straws when you look at Pearson/Bradley's involvement and how similar the work is to Greengrass' Bourne films. I find that Bourne approach really jarred with the general elegance of QOS' filmmaking too, and that the more classical approach Alexander Witt/Stuart Baird contributed to CR would have better complimented the classical aesthetic approach that Forster was engaging with throughout the rest of the film. Just my opinion, of course.

[Sigma7]

Shhhhhhh adults are talking, go play outside

In your case, preferably on a busy road junction...

Wow, you "get" Qos as a movie, and you miss that the chirp was aimed at you LOL, maybe the chirp was just too "grown up" for you. Let me film the chirp in closeup, edit it at 1 second intervals, will that help you to understand ?
BTW, has my grammar improved ? Or must I stay after school and write out lines?

Edited by Sigma7, 10 June 2009 - 06:15 PM.

[Jim]

Enough.

[DamnCoffee]

Oh for god sake, not again!

Can we please get through a thread without bashing/arguing over Quantum of Solace.

Quantum Of Solace is NOT an EXCELLENT movie, and it's NOT a TERRIBLE movie, either. Can we all please keep a civil tongue.

[dee-bee-five]

Shhhhhhh adults are talking, go play outside

In your case, preferably on a busy road junction...

Wow, you "get" Qos as a movie, and you miss that the chirp was aimed at you.

I'm perfectly aware of what was aimed at me and I lobbed back. Though, of course, like all successful lobs it went over your head.

To ignore the Bourne-isms of SOLACE is not ridiculous. What is more ridiculous is completely forgetting that the likes of Bourne were influenced by Bond and the 1960's so SOLACE is not really apeing Bourne but outdoing itself.

By hiring Greengrass' Bourne editor and second unit director to do it for them?

I really like QOS, but I think denying the Bourne influence is really, really grasping at straws when you look at Pearson/Bradley's involvement and how similar the work is to Greengrass' Bourne films. I find that Bourne approach really jarred with the general elegance of QOS' filmmaking too, and that the more classical approach Alexander Witt/Stuart Baird contributed to CR would have better complimented the classical aesthetic approach that Forster was engaging with throughout the rest of the film. Just my opinion, of course.

I'm not sure that one can ignore the influence of Bourne just as, say, Star Wars influenced Moonraker or Shaft influenced LALD. The Bonds have always survived by keeping abreast of cinematic developments. But I don't think QoS was overly influenced. Okay, I might not be the best judge as I really can take or leave the Bourne films and have seen each only once. But I didn't watch QoS and think I was watching Bourne.

Quantum Of Solace is NOT an EXCELLENT movie.

Well, of course, in my eyes it is. But it is only a movie...

[bond 16.05.72]

To ignore the Bourne-isms of SOLACE is not ridiculous. What is more ridiculous is completely forgetting that the likes of Bourne were influenced by Bond and the 1960's so SOLACE is not really apeing Bourne but outdoing itself.

By hiring Greengrass' Bourne editor and second unit director to do it for them?

I really like QOS, but I think denying the Bourne influence is really, really grasping at straws when you look at Pearson/Bradley's involvement and how similar the work is to Greengrass' Bourne films. I find that Bourne approach really jarred with the general elegance of QOS' filmmaking too, and that the more classical approach Alexander Witt/Stuart Baird contributed to CR would have better complimented the classical aesthetic approach that Forster was engaging with throughout the rest of the film. Just my opinion, of course.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, I would have been happy if Forster had kept the previous approach for QOS, I'll make it clear unlike the childish idiot in this thread at the moment I did like QOS I just recognise what (I) see as flaws.

The action I did not like much apart from Forster's Tosca sequence, that was masterful and did point to Bond moving into new areas, that didn't evoke Bourne or Greengrass that was more like De Palma and Copolla.

Bradley stamped his style over those action sequences and the team Campbell used were more preferable to me, QOS might have been more Traditional but CR evoked the more classic look which had eluded Bond since OHMSS.

[dee-bee-five]

To ignore the Bourne-isms of SOLACE is not ridiculous. What is more ridiculous is completely forgetting that the likes of Bourne were influenced by Bond and the 1960's so SOLACE is not really apeing Bourne but outdoing itself.

By hiring Greengrass' Bourne editor and second unit director to do it for them?

I really like QOS, but I think denying the Bourne influence is really, really grasping at straws when you look at Pearson/Bradley's involvement and how similar the work is to Greengrass' Bourne films. I find that Bourne approach really jarred with the general elegance of QOS' filmmaking too, and that the more classical approach Alexander Witt/Stuart Baird contributed to CR would have better complimented the classical aesthetic approach that Forster was engaging with throughout the rest of the film. Just my opinion, of course.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, I would have been happy if Forster had kept the previous approach for QOS, I'll make it clear unlike the childish idiot in this thread at the moment I did like QOS I just recognise what (I) see as flaws.

The action I did not like much apart from Forster's Tosca sequence, that was masterful and did point to Bond moving into new areas, that didn't evoke Bourne or Greengrass that was more like De Palma and Copolla.

Bradley stamped his style over those action sequences and the team Campbell used were more preferable to me, QOS might have been more Traditional but CR evoked the more classic look which had eluded Bond since OHMSS.

I certainly think you have a point with that last thought. That said, some of Hunt's direction - particularly in the fights with the fast cuts - feels much more in tune with Forster than Campbell. The fight with the heavy in Tracy's hotel room is a case in point; another is the fight at Draco's. That's why I referred to Forster directing like Peter Hunt on acid in my original review. It's a shame Bond's foot pursuit of the SPECTRE agent from the College of Arms didn't survive in OHMSS - then we could really compare the three directors!

I guess it all comes down to taste. I find Martin Campbell much more of a journeyman director than an artist. He's a safe pair of hands who, when it comes to Bond, I suspect would never disappoint. Forster is much edgier and I guess it depends whether one likes his edge or not.

[tdalton]

Bradley stamped his style over those action sequences and the team Campbell used were more preferable to me, QOS might have been more Traditional but CR evoked the more classic look which had eluded Bond since OHMSS.

Agreed.

I think that it just comes down to whether or not someone likes the particular style that Bradley brings to the action. It didn't bother me at all (since it was, at least to me, much less shaky than his work on the Bourne films, on which films I did not enjoy the editing of the action sequences), but seeing as how I couldn't stand its overuse in the two Greengrass Bourne films, I certainly understand the arguments made by those who don't enjoy it, as I've made that argument countless times in regards to Bourne.

[tim partridge]

I'm not sure that one can ignore the influence of Bourne just as, say, Star Wars influenced Moonraker or Shaft influenced LALD. The Bonds have always survived by keeping abreast of cinematic developments. But I don't think QoS was overly influenced. Okay, I might not be the best judge as I really can take or leave the Bourne films and have seen each only once. But I didn't watch QoS and think I was watching Bourne.

There's a significant difference between loosely putting Bond in space or loosely pitting Bond against Black American villains and then consciously headhunting the Greengrass Bourne editor/second unit director team. It's the same as when they got Christian Wagner to do his Tony Scottisms all over DAD, clearly because Spy Game was a big hit the year before (oh look, there are the same speedramps in both movies, etc).

[dee-bee-five]

I'm not sure that one can ignore the influence of Bourne just as, say, Star Wars influenced Moonraker or Shaft influenced LALD. The Bonds have always survived by keeping abreast of cinematic developments. But I don't think QoS was overly influenced. Okay, I might not be the best judge as I really can take or leave the Bourne films and have seen each only once. But I didn't watch QoS and think I was watching Bourne.

There's a significant difference between loosely putting Bond in space or loosely pitting Bond against Black American villains and then consciously headhunting the Greengrass Bourne editor/second unit director team. It's the same as when they got Christian Wagner to do his Tony Scottisms all over DAD, clearly because Spy Game was a big hit the year before (oh look, there are the same speedramps in both movies, etc).

But the movie industry is a pretty small community; much more so than it was thirty or forty years ago, so while I think you have a point, I'm not sure you're really comparing like with like. That said, I'm not really too much into Bourne because I don't rate the series (most of all because I think Matt Damon is a terribly overrated actor). If QoS is heavily influenced by Bourne, then so be it. I'm not complaining because I love QoS so much.

[tim partridge]

I'm not sure that one can ignore the influence of Bourne just as, say, Star Wars influenced Moonraker or Shaft influenced LALD. The Bonds have always survived by keeping abreast of cinematic developments. But I don't think QoS was overly influenced. Okay, I might not be the best judge as I really can take or leave the Bourne films and have seen each only once. But I didn't watch QoS and think I was watching Bourne.

There's a significant difference between loosely putting Bond in space or loosely pitting Bond against Black American villains and then consciously headhunting the Greengrass Bourne editor/second unit director team. It's the same as when they got Christian Wagner to do his Tony Scottisms all over DAD, clearly because Spy Game was a big hit the year before (oh look, there are the same speedramps in both movies, etc).

But the movie industry is a pretty small community; much more so than it was thirty or forty years ago, so while I think you have a point, I'm not sure you're really comparing like with like.

What, are you suggesting that Dan Bradley and Richard Pearson were the only qualified action director/editor in England (both are American) available and capable to do Bond?

That is one serious stretch...

[dee-bee-five]

I'm not sure that one can ignore the influence of Bourne just as, say, Star Wars influenced Moonraker or Shaft influenced LALD. The Bonds have always survived by keeping abreast of cinematic developments. But I don't think QoS was overly influenced. Okay, I might not be the best judge as I really can take or leave the Bourne films and have seen each only once. But I didn't watch QoS and think I was watching Bourne.

There's a significant difference between loosely putting Bond in space or loosely pitting Bond against Black American villains and then consciously headhunting the Greengrass Bourne editor/second unit director team. It's the same as when they got Christian Wagner to do his Tony Scottisms all over DAD, clearly because Spy Game was a big hit the year before (oh look, there are the same speedramps in both movies, etc).

But the movie industry is a pretty small community; much more so than it was thirty or forty years ago, so while I think you have a point, I'm not sure you're really comparing like with like.

What, are you suggesting that Dan Bradley and Richard Pearson were the only qualified action director/editor in England (both are American) available and capable to do Bond?

That is one serious stretch...

No, of course not. And I didn't suggest that for a moment, so please don't attribute things to me I haven't written. What I am suggesting is that the film industry is more incestuous than it once was, that's all.

[JimmyBond]

This is not directed at you Zorin but whats all this criticsiing the Madagassca chase sequence, everyone ( all right not everyone) loved this when it appeared first, now with QOS micro bite action it suddenly derivative of Brosnan Bond.

I've always felt this way towards the African chase, even before QoS has come out. To paraphrase Zorin, the sequence is hardly necessary to advance the plot, I in no way dislike the sequence, I just feel that it's not wholy necessary.

It seems as a way of giving QOS some credit we are now going to criticise the one sequence that was voted by fans and outsiders as a true highlight, you might want to bring it down becasue it's not shot so fast that your confused what the hell is going on but it easier to follow that that footchase in Sienna.

That is of course, a matter of opinion, I can follow the Sienna footchase just fine, and find it more engaging than the African chase from CR.

My Wife said to me it was all just too fast, maybe were both getting too old for this but alot of QOS was blur and defend that car chase all you want it won't be seen as anything memorable outside of us fans.

So? I really don't care about what outsiders will think of the chase, I think it's memorable, that's good enough for me.