20 replies to this topic

[DrNoNo]

I went to the theater last night to see QOS. I have seen every movie since GE in the theater on opening night and, usually, multiple times after.

I really thought CR was, quite possibly, the best Bond movie ever. I felt everything came together.

Therefore, I have been eagerly awaiting QOS for the past 2 years.

Over those 2 years...2 long years...I have often wondered and discussed what QOS would be like and how great it would be.

Jeez...

Simply put, QOS seems like an epilogue to Casino Royale. If that's what EON meant to do, then so be it...but they forgot to tell me that part.

No gun barrel (until the end), terrible song, terrible credits. But you know, as others have said, that is not what makes a Bond movie. Those are just small bits of icing on the cake. Those things are not why I feel let down by QOS.

The editing was horrendous. And the camera seemed so close up to the action, that a lot of scenes seemed very blurry and out of focus. If this is an art-house technique, it didn't work well here.

Why did we need very tacky looking titles to tell us where Bond was? Just put it at the bottom of the screen in bold white type like every other movie does.

The writing was horrible. Was Bond grieving over Vesper? Didn't seem like he was to me.

Were we supposed to empathize with Camielle? I didn't.

WAY too much action and not enough story. TND fleshed out characters better than this.

People in fandom bashed the Brosnan Bonds for being all action and no story.

Enter QOS

Granted, the action here is quite good most of the time. Filmed poorly, but choreographed and executed very well.

Wasn't Bond upset about Vesper?

Vesper?

Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?

When we finally make it to the end, we are told nothing about Quantum even though Bond finds out the details from Greene, we the audience and fans are left to ponder.

Vesper? What about her boyfriend? Again, we are told little to nothing.

It's like EON was playing a joke.

Now, these issues may be rectified in the next Bond film due out in 2011.

3 years...3 long years to wonder.

Ultimately this is a 3 out of 5 star movie. It's very middle of the road on par with TLD, TND, etc.

The only saving grace of this film is the acting. Everyone does an admirable job of working with this terrible script and direction.

QOS was a big let down. As a movie, it is ok. As a Bond movie and follow up to the smash hit CR, it is a terrible waster of time, money and energy and a big let down for long time fans of the series, especially fans of CR and the Craig Bond.

See you in 2011.

(Wasn't Bond supposed to be upset about Vesper?)

(Vesper Lynd?)

[Daddy Bond]

Now, I'm sure that there must have been two different versions of this film released.

Because the movie I saw was AMAZING

Well, anyway, thank you for your review. It sounds exactly like a few others already submitted, but you're entitled to your opinion.

[gkgyver]

One could assume that, yes.

The film is about Bond, therefor the film only tells us about Yousef what is relevant to Bond - the rest is irrelevant.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

I went to the theater last night to see QOS. I have seen every movie since GE in the theater on opening night and, usually, multiple times after.

I really thought CR was, quite possibly, the best Bond movie ever. I felt everything came together.

Therefore, I have been eagerly awaiting QOS for the past 2 years.

Over those 2 years...2 long years...I have often wondered and discussed what QOS would be like and how great it would be.

Jeez...

Simply put, QOS seems like an epilogue to Casino Royale. If that's what EON meant to do, then so be it...but they forgot to tell me that part.

No gun barrel (until the end), terrible song, terrible credits. But you know, as others have said, that is not what makes a Bond movie. Those are just small bits of icing on the cake. Those things are not why I feel let down by QOS.

The editing was horrendous. And the camera seemed so close up to the action, that a lot of scenes seemed very blurry and out of focus. If this is an art-house technique, it didn't work well here.

Why did we need very tacky looking titles to tell us where Bond was? Just put it at the bottom of the screen in bold white type like every other movie does.

The writing was horrible. Was Bond grieving over Vesper? Didn't seem like he was to me.

Were we supposed to empathize with Camielle? I didn't.

WAY too much action and not enough story. TND fleshed out characters better than this.

People in fandom bashed the Brosnan Bonds for being all action and no story.

Enter QOS

Granted, the action here is quite good most of the time. Filmed poorly, but choreographed and executed very well.

Wasn't Bond upset about Vesper?

Vesper?

Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?

When we finally make it to the end, we are told nothing about Quantum even though Bond finds out the details from Greene, we the audience and fans are left to ponder.

Vesper? What about her boyfriend? Again, we are told little to nothing.

It's like EON was playing a joke.

Now, these issues may be rectified in the next Bond film due out in 2011.

3 years...3 long years to wonder.

Ultimately this is a 3 out of 5 star movie. It's very middle of the road on par with TLD, TND, etc.

The only saving grace of this film is the acting. Everyone does an admirable job of working with this terrible script and direction.

QOS was a big let down. As a movie, it is ok. As a Bond movie and follow up to the smash hit CR, it is a terrible waster of time, money and energy and a big let down for long time fans of the series, especially fans of CR and the Craig Bond.

See you in 2011.

(Wasn't Bond supposed to be upset about Vesper?)

(Vesper Lynd?)

People started complaining about the Brosnan films once they were told they were allowed to do so (when Craig was chosen). It seems to me the majority of people are uncapable of having their own opinions. It's a joke how many favourable reviews in these forums say QOS is stylish because it was what one of the interviews said. Wasn't Royale stylish? Far more than this one. Wasn't Royale emotional? Way more. Three years down the road posters are going to be holding 23 as "the real foundation of a new series, etc" even if it turns out to be crap.
DAD had a better plot than this. Granted, it was excessive, but it was more satisfying. This one is really too little to have waited two years for.

[JimmyBond]

If my responses get heated, don't take it personally.

Simply put, QOS seems like an epilogue to Casino Royale. If that's what EON meant to do, then so be it...but they forgot to tell me that part.

It does in parts, and to be honest this was one facet of the film that worried me before seeing it. However I felt it was enough of it's own film and I loved it.

No gun barrel (until the end), terrible song, terrible credits. But you know, as others have said, that is not what makes a Bond movie.

Can't think of much to say here except that I disagree.

The editing was horrendous. And the camera seemed so close up to the action, that a lot of scenes seemed very blurry and out of focus. If this is an art-house technique, it didn't work well here.

I loved it myself, that coupled with the music really made the action sequences feel organic. For the first time the film didnt stop for an action scene, each sequence played an important role in the narrative drive of the film.

Why did we need very tacky looking titles to tell us where Bond was? Just put it at the bottom of the screen in bold white type like every other movie does.

Why be like everyone else? There's nothing wrong with standing out in the crowd.

The writing was horrible. Was Bond grieving over Vesper? Didn't seem like he was to me.

You missed the part where he was not sleeping? Or what about the part where he was drunk on the plane? They didnt beat you over the head with the fact, but it was very obvious he was upset.

Were we supposed to empathize with Camielle? I didn't.

Camille was a mirror of Bond in this film, she represented the choices he (ultimately) didnt make.

WAY too much action and not enough story. TND fleshed out characters better than this.

This argument is laughable to me. As much as I enjoy TND it is a very shallow film, it has nothing resembling characterization, whereas this film is swimming in it.

People in fandom bashed the Brosnan Bonds for being all action and no story.

That's not why at all. Plus I like to think I don't bash Brosnan, just TWINE (truly dreadful film).

Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?

I liked it. Wright has chosen an interesting approach to playing the role. And he hasnt changed his performance much from CR anyways.

When we finally make it to the end, we are told nothing about Quantum even though Bond finds out the details from Greene, we the audience and fans are left to ponder.

Vesper? What about her boyfriend? Again, we are told little to nothing.

What did we really need to know about Quantum? They are an evil organization. And Vesper's boyfriend...did you miss the end? It was all spelled out. He gets in close with girls in certain positions so then Quantum can manipulate them.

QOS was a big let down. As a movie, it is ok. As a Bond movie and follow up to the smash hit CR, it is a terrible waster of time, money and energy and a big let down for long time fans of the series, especially fans of CR and the Craig Bond.

I really hate it when people make generalizations about me. I'm a longtime Bond fan, and I enjoyed the hell out of Casino Royale. I do however feel that QoS is a much better film.

People started complaining about the Brosnan films once they were told they were allowed to do so (when Craig was chosen).

Again, I hate it when people make generalizations about me. You know, I did enjoy the Brosnan films in the theater, I won't lie. However even then I knew something was missing.

[Daddy Bond]

If my responses get heated, don't take it personally.

Simply put, QOS seems like an epilogue to Casino Royale. If that's what EON meant to do, then so be it...but they forgot to tell me that part.

It does in parts, and to be honest this was one facet of the film that worried me before seeing it. However I felt it was enough of it's own film and I loved it.

No gun barrel (until the end), terrible song, terrible credits. But you know, as others have said, that is not what makes a Bond movie.

Can't think of much to say here except that I disagree.

The editing was horrendous. And the camera seemed so close up to the action, that a lot of scenes seemed very blurry and out of focus. If this is an art-house technique, it didn't work well here.

I loved it myself, that coupled with the music really made the action sequences feel organic. For the first time the film didnt stop for an action scene, each sequence played an important role in the narrative drive of the film.

Why did we need very tacky looking titles to tell us where Bond was? Just put it at the bottom of the screen in bold white type like every other movie does.

Why be like everyone else? There's nothing wrong with standing out in the crowd.

The writing was horrible. Was Bond grieving over Vesper? Didn't seem like he was to me.

You missed the part where he was not sleeping? Or what about the part where he was drunk on the plane? They didnt beat you over the head with the fact, but it was very obvious he was upset.

Were we supposed to empathize with Camielle? I didn't.

Camille was a mirror of Bond in this film, she represented the choices he (ultimately) didnt make.

WAY too much action and not enough story. TND fleshed out characters better than this.

This argument is laughable to me. As much as I enjoy TND it is a very shallow film, it has nothing resembling characterization, whereas this film is swimming in it.

People in fandom bashed the Brosnan Bonds for being all action and no story.

That's not why at all. Plus I like to think I don't bash Brosnan, just TWINE (truly dreadful film).

Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?

I liked it. Wright has chosen an interesting approach to playing the role. And he hasnt changed his performance much from CR anyways.

When we finally make it to the end, we are told nothing about Quantum even though Bond finds out the details from Greene, we the audience and fans are left to ponder.

Vesper? What about her boyfriend? Again, we are told little to nothing.

What did we really need to know about Quantum? They are an evil organization. And Vesper's boyfriend...did you miss the end? It was all spelled out. He gets in close with girls in certain positions so then Quantum can manipulate them.

QOS was a big let down. As a movie, it is ok. As a Bond movie and follow up to the smash hit CR, it is a terrible waster of time, money and energy and a big let down for long time fans of the series, especially fans of CR and the Craig Bond.

I really hate it when people make generalizations about me. I'm a longtime Bond fan, and I enjoyed the hell out of Casino Royale. I do however feel that QoS is a much better film.

People started complaining about the Brosnan films once they were told they were allowed to do so (when Craig was chosen).

Again, I hate it when people make generalizations about me. You know, I did enjoy the Brosnan films in the theater, I won't lie. However even then I knew something was missing.

DITTO

[Keir]

"Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?"
That's exactly what I was thinking, especially when he was asked if he recognised Bond!
I agree with your review after having seen the film twice now. This is not Bond. Without fun, humour, and a bit of self-knowing asides to the fans, why would anyone wish to be the man and choose this series over the countless others?

[DrNoNo]

I also forgot to mention that most of the audience (sold out 9:30pm Friday night at my local cinema) I saw the film with were groaning and moaning after it was over. I didn't hear any specific things they were saying, but it was obvious the audience I saw it with was not impressed. Anyone else have similar story?

[Tarl_Cabot]

Now, I'm sure that there must have been two different versions of this film released.

Because the movie I saw was AMAZING

Well, anyway, thank you for your review. It sounds exactly like a few others already submitted, but you're entitled to your opinion.

The negativity surrounding QOS is astonishing. This movie is a trillion times better than any Brosnan era film.I absolutely loved this flick. It's forkin awesome!

[Daddy Bond]

"Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?"
That's exactly what I was thinking, especially when he was asked if he recognised Bond!
I agree with your review after having seen the film twice now. This is not Bond. Without fun, humour, and a bit of self-knowing asides to the fans, why would anyone wish to be the man and choose this series over the countless others?

There was LOADS of true humor in this movie. I honestly haven't had a true laugh from a Bond movie since Dalton. The humor in this movie wasn't silly or throw away, it was downright intelligent.

For example, Bond refusing to stay at a crummy motel (he compares it to a morgue - that was funny). Fields gets upset because the crummy motel fits their cover, so Bond goes to the better hotel and tells the concierge they won the lottery! That was hillarious! I laughed out loud. As I did when Bond told M the double agent didn't smoke, and when M was peeved Bond knocked off the contact and said "He killed him?" or when Camille embarrassed Greene, or Fields tripped Elvis, or Bond quips to Felix, "That doesn't give us much time", or Bond gives Greene motor oil to drink (cruel humor, but a bit ironic considering Field's death), or Bond popping out of the elevator after overcoming those guards in the hotel and then casually talking to M, or the Canadian agent saying "Thank you". No, this is some of the BEST humor Bond has seen in AGES, you guys are just missing it. This is not Dumb and Dumber, or Talladega Nights, this is some of the smartest humor that's been in a Bond film for a long time.

[cory47]

I really thought CR was, quite possibly, the best Bond movie ever. I felt everything came together.

Therefore, I have been eagerly awaiting QOS for the past 2 years.

Over those 2 years...2 long years...I have often wondered and discussed what QOS would be like and how great it would be.

Jeez...

Simply put, QOS seems like an epilogue to Casino Royale. If that's what EON meant to do, then so be it...but they forgot to tell me that part.

No gun barrel (until the end), terrible song, terrible credits. But you know, as others have said, that is not what makes a Bond movie. Those are just small bits of icing on the cake. Those things are not why I feel let down by QOS.

The editing was horrendous. And the camera seemed so close up to the action, that a lot of scenes seemed very blurry and out of focus. If this is an art-house technique, it didn't work well here.



The writing was horrible. Was Bond grieving over Vesper? Didn't seem like he was to me.

Were we supposed to empathize with Camielle? I didn't.

WAY too much action and not enough story. TND fleshed out characters better than this.

People in fandom bashed the Brosnan Bonds for being all action and no story.

Enter QOS

Granted, the action here is quite good most of the time. Filmed poorly, but choreographed and executed very well.

Wasn't Bond upset about Vesper?

Vesper?

Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?

When we finally make it to the end, we are told nothing about Quantum even though Bond finds out the details from Greene, we the audience and fans are left to ponder.

Vesper? What about her boyfriend? Again, we are told little to nothing.

It's like EON was playing a joke.

Now, these issues may be rectified in the next Bond film due out in 2011.

3 years...3 long years to wonder.

Ultimately this is a 3 out of 5 star movie. It's very middle of the road on par with TLD, TND, etc.

The only saving grace of this film is the acting. Everyone does an admirable job of working with this terrible script and direction.

QOS was a big let down. As a movie, it is ok. As a Bond movie and follow up to the smash hit CR, it is a terrible waster of time, money and energy and a big let down for long time fans of the series, especially fans of CR and the Craig Bond.

See you in 2011.

(Wasn't Bond supposed to be upset about Vesper?)

(Vesper Lynd?)[/

quote]

Some good observations about this film, especially the muddled script and the poorly shot and edited action sequences. They WERE very well choreographed and executed just not shot and edited well--I blame Marc Forster for this. Also, there was too much action and too little real drama. The action needs to be tempered with better story development and SUSPENSE!!! You know, like what Casino Royale DID SO WELL!!!

Moving the gunbarrel irritated me--the Bond films are a movie series and moving a "trademark" of the series just to accomodate "symbolism" of an individual film is completely unecessary. The gunbarrel has nothing to do with the individual Bond film, but serves as setting the mood for the audience anticipating the Bond adventure to come (in my opinion).

Finally, I wish EON would consider a different music composer for Bond 23. I have never been impressed with David Arnold's Bond film scores. They are merely adequate and never stand out to actually help MAKE a scene.

cory47

Edited by cory47, 16 November 2008 - 04:14 AM.

[gkgyver]

The script wasn't muddled, it just did what Bond films haven't done for ages: it assumed the audience was clever enough to know what's going on without being told explicitly.

Over the 30 years with Moore, and then Brosnan, people forgot what "humor" actually means.

[SecretAgentFan]

If my responses get heated, don't take it personally.

Simply put, QOS seems like an epilogue to Casino Royale. If that's what EON meant to do, then so be it...but they forgot to tell me that part.

It does in parts, and to be honest this was one facet of the film that worried me before seeing it. However I felt it was enough of it's own film and I loved it.

No gun barrel (until the end), terrible song, terrible credits. But you know, as others have said, that is not what makes a Bond movie.

Can't think of much to say here except that I disagree.

The editing was horrendous. And the camera seemed so close up to the action, that a lot of scenes seemed very blurry and out of focus. If this is an art-house technique, it didn't work well here.

I loved it myself, that coupled with the music really made the action sequences feel organic. For the first time the film didnt stop for an action scene, each sequence played an important role in the narrative drive of the film.

Why did we need very tacky looking titles to tell us where Bond was? Just put it at the bottom of the screen in bold white type like every other movie does.

Why be like everyone else? There's nothing wrong with standing out in the crowd.

The writing was horrible. Was Bond grieving over Vesper? Didn't seem like he was to me.

You missed the part where he was not sleeping? Or what about the part where he was drunk on the plane? They didnt beat you over the head with the fact, but it was very obvious he was upset.

Were we supposed to empathize with Camielle? I didn't.

Camille was a mirror of Bond in this film, she represented the choices he (ultimately) didnt make.

WAY too much action and not enough story. TND fleshed out characters better than this.

This argument is laughable to me. As much as I enjoy TND it is a very shallow film, it has nothing resembling characterization, whereas this film is swimming in it.

People in fandom bashed the Brosnan Bonds for being all action and no story.

That's not why at all. Plus I like to think I don't bash Brosnan, just TWINE (truly dreadful film).

Why was Felix talking like he was in a Sergio Leone spaghetti western?

I liked it. Wright has chosen an interesting approach to playing the role. And he hasnt changed his performance much from CR anyways.

When we finally make it to the end, we are told nothing about Quantum even though Bond finds out the details from Greene, we the audience and fans are left to ponder.

Vesper? What about her boyfriend? Again, we are told little to nothing.

What did we really need to know about Quantum? They are an evil organization. And Vesper's boyfriend...did you miss the end? It was all spelled out. He gets in close with girls in certain positions so then Quantum can manipulate them.

QOS was a big let down. As a movie, it is ok. As a Bond movie and follow up to the smash hit CR, it is a terrible waster of time, money and energy and a big let down for long time fans of the series, especially fans of CR and the Craig Bond.

I really hate it when people make generalizations about me. I'm a longtime Bond fan, and I enjoyed the hell out of Casino Royale. I do however feel that QoS is a much better film.

People started complaining about the Brosnan films once they were told they were allowed to do so (when Craig was chosen).

Again, I hate it when people make generalizations about me. You know, I did enjoy the Brosnan films in the theater, I won't lie. However even then I knew something was missing.

Thank you, Jimmy, for responding very well and to the point.

By the way, I find it extremely frightening if people say that they could not identify with Camille (whose family was butchered and raped)...

[gkgyver]

Why do people always have to quote, like half a page every time??

[SecretAgentFan]

Why do people always have to quote, like half a page every time??

It´s more fun than having to scroll up for the points that are being debated.

[gkgyver]

Why do people always have to quote, like half a page every time??

It´s more fun than having to scroll up for the points that are being debated.

Tell it to the index finger!

[bendertherobot]

I also forgot to mention that most of the audience (sold out 9:30pm Friday night at my local cinema) I saw the film with were groaning and moaning after it was over. I didn't hear any specific things they were saying, but it was obvious the audience I saw it with was not impressed. Anyone else have similar story?

Perhaps they had bad tummies after the sweets? Or too much diet coke?

After all, actual dialogue is always a good method of judging what people felt.

Interesting that it was still sold out after all this time as well.

The script wasn't muddled, it just did what Bond films haven't done for ages: it assumed the audience was clever enough to know what's going on without being told explicitly.

Over the 30 years with Moore, and then Brosnan, people forgot what "humor" actually means.

Indeed. Take the "Greene v Bond" on the stairs. A look to his "protectors" to signal the chase. A look from Greene to Bond and then run. Intelligent stuff, and no "Ah, Mr Bond, let me tell you my plan."

Perhaps the plot isn't GRAND enough for people. There clearly is a plot and the plot is very easy to understand. Perhaps people don't care about people in the third world being manipulated because, somehow, it doesn't affect them. Perhaps that's it. Bond is saving Bolivians. Who cares? I know I did because that's the first step in a very insidous threat indeed. One which you don't see coming and, when you do see it, it's oh so very too late.

[DrNoNo]

I also forgot to mention that most of the audience (sold out 9:30pm Friday night at my local cinema) I saw the film with were groaning and moaning after it was over. I didn't hear any specific things they were saying, but it was obvious the audience I saw it with was not impressed. Anyone else have similar story?

Perhaps they had bad tummies after the sweets? Or too much diet coke?

After all, actual dialogue is always a good method of judging what people felt.

Interesting that it was still sold out after all this time as well.

The script wasn't muddled, it just did what Bond films haven't done for ages: it assumed the audience was clever enough to know what's going on without being told explicitly.

Over the 30 years with Moore, and then Brosnan, people forgot what "humor" actually means.

Indeed. Take the "Greene v Bond" on the stairs. A look to his "protectors" to signal the chase. A look from Greene to Bond and then run. Intelligent stuff, and no "Ah, Mr Bond, let me tell you my plan."

Perhaps the plot isn't GRAND enough for people. There clearly is a plot and the plot is very easy to understand. Perhaps people don't care about people in the third world being manipulated because, somehow, it doesn't affect them. Perhaps that's it. Bond is saving Bolivians. Who cares? I know I did because that's the first step in a very insidous threat indeed. One which you don't see coming and, when you do see it, it's oh so very too late.

Actually, I felt some anti-American sentiments in the movie. Like, the United States is the only country to deal with certain people or certain organizations. As if to say, things are worse because the United States is dealing with Quantum.

And I didn't much care for those lines or implications.

Of course, the United States does things every day for the good of the country. Some of these things are better left to the imagination.

Just as Bond is doing some things good or bad for the good of HIS country.

And I would even venture to say that the United States has done more in it's 200 years of existence to free people from tyranny than most any other country on the planet. Including jolly old England, France, etc.

So, if people in Bolivia need water to drink, who you going to ask for help?

In real life, it surely isn't going to be MI6

[Garth007]

When i after QoS was over both times i seen it. people left loving the movie saying it was the best one yet along with being tied with CR tho of course. now as for USA refrence in the movie. we do tend to as i can say "deals with everyone" when really we shouldn't. but enough about that tho. i don't want an argument with that but i think QoS Was really great. it just need more of like a build up on its scenes. But is my second fav. bond film with CR as my first.

[bendertherobot]

So, if people in Bolivia need water to drink, who you going to ask for help?

In real life, it surely isn't going to be MI6

Ask them?

It's Bourne, Bond, Bauer or Bristow.

Bourne can't remember his own name FFS!

Bauer? Possible. But that means at least twice the amount of "we have people everywhere."

Bristow? Hard guy. Not physical enough.

So, in an ever chaning world the world can still only really turn to one man.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

I also forgot to mention that most of the audience (sold out 9:30pm Friday night at my local cinema) I saw the film with were groaning and moaning after it was over. I didn't hear any specific things they were saying, but it was obvious the audience I saw it with was not impressed. Anyone else have similar story?

Thatt's very similar to my experience. I used to work in a cinema and you get to know if an audience has enjoyed a film. The atmosphere wasn't that great, people seemed unimpressed. Comments I heard were "wasn't as good as Casino Royale", "just seemed like an average action film2 and, most damagingly, "I almost nodded off".