100 replies to this topic

[blueman]

With the Vesper story arc completed, I can see Bond 23 being more like Craig says, sure. Bring it on!

[Lazenby]

I left the movie saying that it was the worst of the Bourne series. When does Bond 22 come out?

[SecretAgentFan]

I left the movie saying that it was the worst of the Bourne series. When does Bond 22 come out?

MUHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHMMMUUUUUUUUUUUUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH...

[Publius]

Quantum had so much opportunity to explore Bond's psychology, but failed to ever deliver anything much more than "filler" between one action scene and the next.

I thought it did an excellent job of this, but admittedly it was light on the speeches you see in TDK or even CR (then again, I prefer it that way). Bond's psyche was explored in more nuanced ways, from blink-and-you'll-miss-it things he did to frenetic action that was palpably reflective of Bond's mental state (have any of us started dissecting Bond's futile, visibly frustrating attempt to save the plane?).

Also, just as CR was "action movie deep" when it came to romance and the theme of betrayal, so was QoS when it came to the issues of trust, vengeance, and duty. I suppose it could have been deeper, more philosophical, with more talky scenes for the characters to work out these dilemmas... but this was a tightly focused spy thriller (and yes, action-adventure) about a relatively simple heroic figure. Just as they were wise to not elaborate on Bond's past in CR (it would have been irrelevant), I'm glad they kept the exploration of Bond's psyche in QoS straight and to the point.

[Daddy Bond]

Quantum had so much opportunity to explore Bond's psychology, but failed to ever deliver anything much more than "filler" between one action scene and the next.

I thought it did an excellent job of this, but admittedly it was light on the speeches you see in TDK or even CR. Bond's psyche was explored in more nuanced ways, from blink-and-you'll-miss-it things he did to frenetic action that was palpably reflective of Bond's mental state (have any of us started dissecting Bond's futile, visibly frustrating attempt to save the plane?).

Also, just as CR was "action movie deep" when it came to romance and the theme of betrayal, so was QoS when it came to the issues of trust, vengeance, and duty. I suppose it could have been deeper, more philosophical, with more talky scenes for the characters to work out these dilemmas... but this was a tightly focused spy thriller (and yes, action-adventure) about a relatively simple heroic figure. Just as they were wise to not elaborate on Bond's past in CR (it would have been irrelevant), I'm glad they kept the exploration of Bond's psyche in QoS straight and to the point.

Was it light on speeches? I don't agree.

[Publius]

Was it light on speeches? I don't agree.

Well, compared to recent Bond films (and other action blockbusters that have tried to be "deep," like TDK), I think so. Although I should add I prefer it that way. I like it better when films show and do rather than say.

[MattofSteel]

Quantum was a heck of a lot deeper than a portion of people seem to want to give it credit for. Granted, I think a lot of that has to do with Forster's style of filmmaking. He's much more of a visually nuanced type of person, rather than relying on dialogue to convey things.

[byline]

Quantum was a heck of a lot deeper than a portion of people seem to want to give it credit for. Granted, I think a lot of that has to do with Forster's style of filmmaking. He's much more of a visually nuanced type of person, rather than relying on dialogue to convey things.

I agree. Film is a visual medium, which is why I prefer the "show, don't tell" style of storytelling. I think with multiple viewings, most of these questions will become a lot clearer, including the grief we can see Bond struggling with. Frankly, I like films I can see again and again and get new things with each viewing.

[MattofSteel]

I agree. Film is a visual medium, which is why I prefer the "show, don't tell" style of storytelling. I think with multiple viewings, most of these questions will become a lot clearer, including the grief we can see Bond struggling with. Frankly, I like films I can see again and again and get new things with each viewing.

Definitely. And even more specifically, what we have with Quantum is a director who took the Bond brand and integrated it into his own sensibilities, as opposed to the tendency in the past for directors to adjust themselves and bring their ideas into a palette that never changed. One detraction I will afford the Brosnan era is that all 4 films look and feel basically the same, which is not something that was common to any other Bond actor.

Remember allllllll through production, when virtually everyone was saying "It's as much a Marc Forster film as a James Bond film" ? They weren't kidding.

[Judo chop]

Yes, I agree. They should bring Bond back.

The petition seems unnecessary though, since EON's already on the case and has signed up Craig for another one.

[Johnboy007]

Yes, I agree. They should bring Bond back.

The petition seems unnecessary though, since EON's already on the case and has signed up Craig for another one.

My thoughts exactly.

[Quincy]

*James Bond is already here*

[gkgyver]

And here to stay.

[jaguar007]

I say:
BRING BACK JAMES BOND IN THE NEXT MOVIE!

Do you agree?

He is back, maybe you missed him. He returned in 2006.

Seriously, every Bond has been different. The Bond in QoS is no further from the Bond in FRWL than the Bond in TSWLM was. In the early 70s people wanted Bond back because Roger Moore's Bond was so different from Connery. In the late 80s people wanted Bond back because Dalton was so different from Moore. In the mid-90's I wanted Bond back because Brosnan was no Dalton. Brosnan to Craig is no different than any of the other transition from one actor to another. I know you are not talking about the actor but the style of film, look at the difference between FRWL and GF. Totally different style of films. The difference between CR and QoS is similar.

[Elvenstar]

I agree. Film is a visual medium, which is why I prefer the "show, don't tell" style of storytelling. I think with multiple viewings, most of these questions will become a lot clearer, including the grief we can see Bond struggling with. Frankly, I like films I can see again and again and get new things with each viewing.

Definitely. And even more specifically, what we have with Quantum is a director who took the Bond brand and integrated it into his own sensibilities, as opposed to the tendency in the past for directors to adjust themselves and bring their ideas into a palette that never changed. One detraction I will afford the Brosnan era is that all 4 films look and feel basically the same, which is not something that was common to any other Bond actor.

Remember allllllll through production, when virtually everyone was saying "It's as much a Marc Forster film as a James Bond film" ? They weren't kidding.

Yes. Its a Mark Forster film with James Bond in the lead. And I feel great about it! It will be interesting if they will have the courage to fully trust the director of Bond 23 just like it was the case with Mark.
I suspect not. Maybe due to Qos bashing. But Im soo ready to see another derector's vision of Bond.

[blueman]

As successful as QOS has been for EON, I would expect 23 to be approached by EON similarly. I don't see them going backwards, only forwards; CR and now QOS lay a fantastic foundation for Bond to continue on in the same vein IMO.

[Ultraussie (Jordan.adams)]

"Bond bug is a bug waiting to be squashed, and the west will run with fear!"

Shut the ing hell up.

I havent seen QOS, but I guess Bond Buggie has a point.


I agree, so I sign my name down. Anyone who posts has techically signed their signature!!!

[[dark]]

"Bond bug is a bug waiting to be squashed, and the west will run with fear!"

Shut the ing hell up.

Tone it down, Ultraussie.

[darkpath]

Where was James Bond?


I say:
BRING BACK JAMES BOND IN THE NEXT MOVIE!

Do you agree?

I'm afraid I can not agree. I saw plenty of wit and charm, plenty of confidence and charisma.

Spoiler

Even when he upgraded the hotel room, all in keeping with the constraints of his cover, that was, to me, pure Bond, pure charm and sophistication, layered over resourcefulness and cleverness.

I'm sorry you didn't see that, but we can surely agree to disagree.

[BlackFire]

Bond is back since 2006 mate...

[HildebrandRarity]

I left the movie saying that it was the worst of the Bourne series. When does Bond 22 come out?

Funny, something similar was said after OHMSS came out. Where's James Bond? Hence no reference to anything that Lazenby did in Diamonds Are Forever.

In fact, of the 22 gunbarrels, only in OHMSS does the pouring blood wash away any trace or silhouette of Bond in the iris. As if they were symbolically wiping out any trace of that useless Aussie who 'acted' in the movie.

Check it. I'm right. Every other of the remaining 21 gunbarrels has a hint of Bond remaining after the blood comes down. Even Bob Simmons!

[gkgyver]

Well, OHMSS didn't turn out so bad, did it?

[DamnCoffee]

Shut the ing hell up.

I havent seen QOS, but I guess Bond Buggie has a point.

Why don't you go and see the damn film, then? Instead of spamming your miserable around here, making everyones life a misery.

And how dare you talk to me like that, your parents really need to teach you some manners.

[tdalton]

Where was James Bond?


I say:
BRING BACK JAMES BOND IN THE NEXT MOVIE!

Do you agree?

I'm afraid I can not agree. I saw plenty of wit and charm, plenty of confidence and charisma.

Spoiler

Even when he upgraded the hotel room, all in keeping with the constraints of his cover, that was, to me, pure Bond, pure charm and sophistication, layered over resourcefulness and cleverness.

I'm sorry you didn't see that, but we can surely agree to disagree.

Agreed. I thought that the scene you mentioned in the spoiler tag was particularly funny, and one of the more humorous moments in the entire franchise. I had no idea that such a situation was coming (one of the few things I didn't know about the film), and I just about fell out of my chair laughing at that scene. It was also great because it was very much a Bondian moment, and it was one that was very funny while still fitting in with the realistic context of the film.

[jaguar007]

There were plenty of Bondian moments in QoS. I don't understand where these people are coming from saying that Craig has no humor, he shows plenty of humor in QoS. He just does not say cheesy one liners while raising his voice tone and wiggling his eyebrows. His humor is much more deadpan like Connery in Dr. No. and FRWL.

[double o ego]

I agree. Film is a visual medium, which is why I prefer the "show, don't tell" style of storytelling. I think with multiple viewings, most of these questions will become a lot clearer, including the grief we can see Bond struggling with. Frankly, I like films I can see again and again and get new things with each viewing.

Definitely. And even more specifically, what we have with Quantum is a director who took the Bond brand and integrated it into his own sensibilities, as opposed to the tendency in the past for directors to adjust themselves and bring their ideas into a palette that never changed. One detraction I will afford the Brosnan era is that all 4 films look and feel basically the same, which is not something that was common to any other Bond actor.

Remember allllllll through production, when virtually everyone was saying "It's as much a Marc Forster film as a James Bond film" ? They weren't kidding.

Yes. Its a Mark Forster film with James Bond in the lead. And I feel great about it! It will be interesting if they will have the courage to fully trust the director of Bond 23 just like it was the case with Mark.
I suspect not. Maybe due to Qos bashing. But Im soo ready to see another derector's vision of Bond.

But inspite of the bashing QoS gets, I think some of the points are understandable, valid and is of easy rectifying i.e. no more rapid editing cuts and frantic shakey cam, throw in more traditional Bond hallmarks aaaaaand you've already pleased 3/4 of the people who had issues with this film.

There were plenty of Bondian moments in QoS. I don't understand where these people are coming from saying that Craig has no humor, he shows plenty of humor in QoS. He just does not say cheesy one liners while raising his voice tone and wiggling his eyebrows. His humor is much more deadpan like Connery in Dr. No. and FRWL.

Agreed! Although, imo Connery's timing and delivery is unequalled.

Well, OHMSS didn't turn out so bad, did it?

No it's just that it took over 20 years for people to appreciate it and give it the recognition it deserves.

[byline]

I agree, so I sign my name down. Anyone who posts has techically signed their signature!!!

Um, no, we are replying to opinions expressed in a thread in a public forum. People who sign their names are those who have explicitly agreed to sign that petition. Those who have not, but have replied otherwise, don't count. Anything other than that is inaccurate, not to mention a "bait and switch" tactic that pretty much defeats the purpose of any petition . . . including this one.

[stamper]

Actually, I think Bond was his usual self in the movie... it's the movie that wasn't Bondish.

[Daddy Bond]

Actually, I think Bond was his usual self in the movie... it's the movie that wasn't Bondish.

Really, I found it very ishy...

[Judo chop]

There were plenty of Bondian moments in QoS. I don't understand where these people are coming from saying that Craig has no humor

This is just a guess, but it might come from the belief that seriousness and humor cannot coexist. There's an obvious element of seriousness in QOS, and so the feelers for humor get put away. After all, there's no point in even looking for something that cannot be there.

Erroneous premise, obviously.