18 replies to this topic

[Cruiserweight]

To think people told me weeks ago to get my ticket in advance & yet there were only about 20 people in the place.


1.I actually like the gun barrel & main titles.
2.Dominic Greene is now my favorite bond villain.
3.Favorite scene:The opera
4.This film made me want to eat Strawberrys...


Question:Is General Medrano a second main villain(Orlov & Whitaker) or does he fall into the henchman category?


Overall QOS was good enough to crack my top 10.Probably around the 6-8 spots.


The people who update the dossier page need to update the dossier choices to include the QOS choices asap because i have some changes to make.

[DamnCoffee]

Is General Medrano a second main villain(Orlov & Whitaker) or does he fall into the henchman category?


Overall QOS was good enough to crack my top 10.Probably around the 6-8 spots.

I would say he is neither. Actually no, I take that back.... he is the main villain for Camille, but not for Bond.

I wouldn't say he was a henchman though, more like an... aquatiance of Dominic Greene. Not even that.


Oh and, according to the Quantum of Solace game, his first name is Louiz.

[Cruiserweight]

What was up with all the weird sounds that Greene was making during the end fight?

& the only good thing about Elvis? His heart shaped belt buckle.

[LazyAmerican24]

Yeah I thought Greene was a good Bond villain. My only problem with it was that went by so fast, LOL. I was like, "Wait, it's over? NOOOOOOO!!!" And I love the homage they made to Goldfinger, those who've seen the film will know what I'm talking about.

[carddoug]

The opera scene was also my fav.

[dinovelvet]

Is General Medrano a second main villain(Orlov & Whitaker) or does he fall into the henchman category?


Overall QOS was good enough to crack my top 10.Probably around the 6-8 spots.

I would say he is neither. Actually no, I take that back.... he is the main villain for Camille, but not for Bond.

I wouldn't say he was a henchman though, more like an... aquatiance of Dominic Greene. Not even that.

Yes I would say their relationship is more like Orlov and Kamal for most of the movie, joint villains who have united for different goals, though later on, Greene makes it quite clear that he OWNS Medrano.

[Daddy Bond]

The opera scene was also my fav.

SPOILER:

It was awesome how Bond told Quantum that they should find a better place to meet (or something like that) and they start getting up and he starts snapping their pictures.

Brilliant. Bond's not only a tough guy, he's clever as all get out!!!

[DR76]

I haven't written a full review of the movie yet. I thought it had a solid story. My problem is that the story wasn't fully executed by Marc Foster and the screenwriters. I think that the movie is basically rushed - aside from the Bolivia sequences in the second half. Craig was flawless as Bond. Again, he deserves an acting nomination for his work. Olga Kurylenko was excellent, as well. Although I think she lacks some of Eva Green's style. Overall, I would rate this movie as 7/10.

[byline]

Hubby and I saw it tonight. I, too, felt the story was rushed and didn't really settle in till the second half. The editing had a hyperactive quality that made the story feel rushed to me, too. It was a relief to see things finally settle in during the second half. I also felt that many of the camera angles were too tight, to the point that I couldn't see what was going on. It was almost a video-game style of cinematography . . . and maybe that was the point.

It's one of the reasons why I loved "Casino Royale" so much; it seemed a throwback to a more classic style of cinematic storytelling. I'd hoped we would get more of that; we already have too many films running at breakneck speed nowadays.

Having said that, there were many positives: Daniel Craig being the main one, of course. Still love his chemistry with Judi Dench. Wish we could've see maybe a momentary flicker of grief over Vesper. It was there, but extremely subtle, very much buried. Again, maybe that was the point.

Watching his opening opening fight scenes, I found myself wondering if any of the other Bond actors could have pulled that off. Brosnan? Not a chance. As with "Casino Royale," here is someone who convinces me he is fully capable of doing what his job description calls for. People don't just say it about him; they know it.

Spoiler

I was a bit surprised at Mathis asking about the drink. Wasn't he there in the casino when Bond first ordered it?

Wondered if it was too much of a plot leap, in that early scene in Haiti, to have Bond let Camille go with nary a question. Yes, I know he was pretending to be the geologist, but hubby and I both felt there needed to be a bit more dialogue there to make that transition believable.

Also, I was fully expecting Bond to find Mr. White at the end and nail him. Is that unfinished business, or has Bond moved on?

Edited by byline, 16 November 2008 - 07:34 PM.

[DR76]

Still love his chemistry with Judi Dench. Wish we could've see maybe a momentary flicker of grief over Vesper. It was there, but extremely subtle, very much buried. Again, maybe that was the point.

I think that Bond's grief over Vesper was expressed in his anger . . . except in his scenes with Mathis. For a few seconds, it looked as if Bond was about to burst into tears, when Mathis was discussing Vesper.

[Turn]

Hubby and I saw it tonight. I, too, felt the story was rushed and didn't really settle in till the second half. The editing had a hyperactive quality that made the story feel rushed to me, too. It was a relief to see things finally settle in during the second half. I also felt that many of the camera angles were too tight, to the point that I couldn't see what was going on. It was almost a video-game style of cinematography . . . and maybe that was the point.

I actually liked the first half better than the second, which I thought suffered. Maybe I am somebody who enjoys the ride getting there rather than the payoff in films, but I feel that way about most of the Bond films.

I also wasn't a big fan of the tight camera angles. It made me wonder if the DVD era is making us more aware of these types of things on the big screen as opposed to the home as there were things I noticed on CR on DVD I hadn't in the cinema.

[byline]

Still love his chemistry with Judi Dench. Wish we could've see maybe a momentary flicker of grief over Vesper. It was there, but extremely subtle, very much buried. Again, maybe that was the point.

I think that Bond's grief over Vesper was expressed in his anger . . . except in his scenes with Mathis. For a few seconds, it looked as if Bond was about to burst into tears, when Mathis was discussing Vesper.

True. I definitely need to watch it a second time. The first viewing just flew by. Hubby felt the same way. So I'm sure I missed many subtleties.

Spoiler

So do you think that his rage in those early killings acted as a catharsis for his grief over Vesper, so that by the time he got around to finding Vesper's former lover (who wasn't so loving, after all), he wouldn't have to kill him?

I had to chuckle near the end that they showed a Canadian agent. I imagine Americans (and I'm one) wondering, "Canada has spies?" Living in Canada, I'm fully aware of CSIS, but I doubt that many outside of Canada are.

Hubby and I saw it tonight. I, too, felt the story was rushed and didn't really settle in till the second half. The editing had a hyperactive quality that made the story feel rushed to me, too. It was a relief to see things finally settle in during the second half. I also felt that many of the camera angles were too tight, to the point that I couldn't see what was going on. It was almost a video-game style of cinematography . . . and maybe that was the point.

I actually liked the first half better than the second, which I thought suffered. Maybe I am somebody who enjoys the ride getting there rather than the payoff in films, but I feel that way about most of the Bond films.

I also wasn't a big fan of the tight camera angles. It made me wonder if the DVD era is making us more aware of these types of things on the big screen as opposed to the home as there were things I noticed on CR on DVD I hadn't in the cinema.

The first half of the film felt like one chase/fight scene after another. Maybe it has to do with expectations, but it was hard for me to get into the story with such rapid-fire editing and scene changes, so little exposition. (Would this have had something to do with getting the script done before the writers' strike? Maybe that's part of why the film felt underdeveloped and rushed, because the script was . . . well, rushed.)

Spoiler

Which reminds me: What did Bond do to the henchman who was in the geologist's hotel room in Haiti? Obviously he killed him, but how? I'm assuming he was stabbed, since it was a knife fight, but that wasn't clear to me.

And actually, that was a fair source of confusion for hubby and me. We thought that was the geologist in the room . . . though, as we realized afterward, he fought pretty well for a geologist, so he must've been one of Greene's henchman who was supposed to kill Camille. And then the fellow in the water Greene showed to Camille was the geologist. Took me a while to work that out.

Speaking of scene changes: I wasn't wild about the location cards being in a different font each time, I guess to signify something about the place. It drew attention to itself, which took me out of the story. Again. Too self-conscious for my tastes. But that's just me.

I think the issue with camera angles doesn't have so much to do with DVDs, but what I like to see in a film. Film is a visual medium, so I want to be able to actually see what's happening. Contrast the free-running sequence up on the crane in "Casino Royale" (or even the stairwell fight scene) with one of those early "Quantum of Solace" chase/fight scenes, and they're completely different. Because the camera drew back and actually allowed us to see the danger, I felt it, almost viscerally. I remember gasping the first time I saw the two of them up on the crane. That didn't happen for me with "Quantum of Solace" because I wasn't given enough space to feel the danger.

Edited by byline, 16 November 2008 - 07:35 PM.

[Cruiserweight]

A couple of small tidbits:

I think Elvis looks like our Righty007.(During the opera scene mostly)

I could tell the small audience i was sitting with were not hardcore bond fans.They found it funny for some reason & laughed when M said Greene had been found dead with two bullets to the head?!

[Craig is 007]

A couple of small tidbits:

I think Elvis looks like our Righty007.(During the opera scene mostly)

I could tell the small audience i was sitting with were not hardcore bond fans.They found it funny for some reason & laughed when M said Greene had been found dead with two bullets to the head?!

I am pretty sure that they were laughing because M said that Greene was found with motor oil in his stomach, and two bullets in his head.

[Cruiserweight]

A couple of small tidbits:

I think Elvis looks like our Righty007.(During the opera scene mostly)

I could tell the small audience i was sitting with were not hardcore bond fans.They found it funny for some reason & laughed when M said Greene had been found dead with two bullets to the head?!

I am pretty sure that they were laughing because M said that Greene was found with motor oil in his stomach, and two bullets in his head.

No,she says two bullets first & they started laughing before she even got the oil line out.

[J.B.]

Warning before you read this: What I write may contain spoilers for those who havent seen the movie yet.

Okay. I read the negative reviews of QoS the night before I attended on Friday. Usually, if critics dislike a film, that means I WILL like it. And I did enjoy QoS. I enjoyed it alot. It met my expectations in many areas. Here is what I thought after it and my questions for anyone to comment on and bounce around...

The likeness to the Bourne films: Back before CR came out, everyone speculated that EON was going to turn Bond into imitating Bourne in character and script. They replaced Brosnan and put a Bourne looking actor in his place, Craig. They wanted to reboot the franchise. I think folks can actually concede now that that is who Bond is now. Bond is Bourne now except for one area, feeling. Matt Damon in his role as Bourne shows more emotion than Craig does as Bond. Craig is more the cold hearted assassin than is Damon as Bourne. Now, I know that Craig is getting over Vesper etc. But, I have the feeling that this will not be a strong suit for Craig as a bond actor overall. So, he will play out this cold assassin "no feeling" style because it plays to his strength as an actor.

Also, nowhere was the Bourne similarity more than in the action sequences, where there were many throughout the film. The car chase was AWESOME but head wrenching. My head hurt after it and the other similar scenes. I dont know why the director edited it this way. You cant savor any of the action or feel apart of it. I mean, if you were actually in that Aston Martin it wouldnt have been that quick or fast.

The Likeness to CR: Much of the dialogue I thought patterned CR's great dialogue. How many times do we have to hear M say to Bond that she doesnt trust him? Or, This is a rough business etc. Or, Dont go for revenge. There were other patterns of dialogue where M outwardly talks about Bond to others in the same way as CR. I thought, did they run out of stuff to say in this film. Why the repeated dialogue?

The Music: Why in the world, didnt they play any Bond thematic music? I kept thinking, "Man, this would be even better with the Bond music of DAD or the earlier films(updated of course)." Even better through the action sequences! CR ended with the theme so you cant say that they are waiting to put it back in. I thought it would have been perfect. Instead, the music sounded similar to the CR music. Now, I will say that the gun barrel at the end was cool but it ended like CR with the bond theme at the end. It was like, "Well, we arent sure if we should have played it at the end of CR so we will do it again in QoS.

The CGI: I hope that I dont read any more complaints from folks who liked this film yet complain about DAD's overuse of the CGI in scenes that seemed too fake to folks. After that plane crash scene or the fire sequences in QoS, I felt like I was watching a combination of the helicopter ending of DAD and the parachute surfing in DAD as well. I thought it was well done. CGI is now apart of film making so we all better just get used to it.

On the other side:

The graphics of MI6 were great! I think that the movie that it reminded me of was that Tom Cruise one, Minority Report(?). The glass screens with maps etc were excellent!

Also, the parallel to TSWLM's Sphynx show fight scene with the fight stuff in the opera scene I thought was great! When Craig injects himself in the conversation with Quantum...superb!

Overall, the whole movie I thought was great. There many instances where you had to "read things" into what was happening for it to make sense. And my concern is that it will leave the general public lost at points. Only real Bond followers will follow what is happening because we will have seen CR enough to see inside what is happening.

Look, I miss the old formula. I wish it would come back. But I also know that what QoS is is what Hollywood is going to these days. They are trying to make films as real life as they can. I am from the school that said Hollywood was supposed to make movies that helped you escape, not visit real life even more graphically. The old formula worked well and would've worked well today. Bond movies are now just another action film like Batman or Bourne. They will do well but will now be just like the others. The danger is that now they will be judged against them rather than the other way around.

That said, I will definitely see it again at the theater because it was a great action film.

[DaveBond21]

I haven't written a full review of the movie yet. I thought it had a solid story. My problem is that the story wasn't fully executed by Marc Foster and the screenwriters. I think that the movie is basically rushed

I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that. There is something about it that doesn't make it as good as Casino Royale. Plus the action scenes are all "shaky-camera" plus the plane is a mixture of TLD and DAD, and I honestly never thought I'd say that about this film until I saw it.

Does anyone else think that the trailer had better action sequences than the movie? This is important, because I think they may have done something a bit different when editing it (and I am harking back to old comments from Marc Forster about being short of time).

[dennisbolt]

I too thought the Opera scene was the best. At first It seemed very improbable. Like, what a silly AustinPowers-place to have a meeting of bad guys?? Come on, can't they meet in a lair somewhere? Why the ear pieces etc. What made it for me , was when Craig interjected and told them "You better find a beter place to meet!" The soundtrack and editing of that "escape" from the opera was great. I wish the soundtrack album had the great non-Arnold music on it.

I thought that CR had too many long action sequences (namely Madagascar and Miami airport), and then a poker gmae that was so long that they could fit 2 action scenes within it. I thought QOS actions scenes were almost too short (editing amde them worse), or at least they needed more breathing space between them. If they combined CR and QOS into one 4-hour movie and then broke it into two parts people might be happy? I thought the CR Venice scenes were too much, and maybe they might have been better in QOS?

Overall I was impressed with QOS-just enough high points, without too many groaners, to make it a good Bond film. It will settle out as one of the good and smaller efforts like Living Daylights, GoldenEye, FYEO. Not in my top 5, but not in my bottom 5.

[sharpshooter]

The opera scene was also my fav.

I love that scene. It will be looked back upon as a classic Bond moment.