
Quantum of Solace ending
#31
Posted 18 November 2008 - 04:51 PM
#32
Posted 18 November 2008 - 04:53 PM
In fact, I'll go so far as to say it was one of the best endings to one of the best Bond movies.
I agree. I wasn't a fan of having Bond making out with a chick (for far too many times; once in a while it's ok, but not so often) at the end of the movie.
#33
Posted 18 November 2008 - 04:54 PM
A total stranger with a gun has broken into the apartment and told this girl the man she loves is actually a cold hearted, lying bastard... she believes him without question, says 'thank you' and calmly walks out?
Without question? Hardly. He completely nails her occupation and status - clearly he's a guy who has her situation sussed. The fist questions that would have come to mind are answered before they're asked.
At which point, especially after being shown the necklace, she need only look at the relationship to date. How Yusef found her, seduced her. You don't need five minutes of dialogue about how she always felt something wasn't quite right - the 'thank you' tells you everything.
Plus: Bond's a guy with a gun. She's not going to run off and cry, she's also going to call her agency. Eventually they'll prove what she knows in her gut is right, but in the meantime she's been allowed out from under gunpoint to do so. For a girl who, like Vesper, probably isn't used to being in that kind of position too often, she is grateful for the mercy.
#34
Posted 18 November 2008 - 05:22 PM
#35
Posted 18 November 2008 - 05:24 PM
For me it would have been great if when the female Canadian agent walks out & embarrasing says 'thank You", says instead, "who are you", and DC says "Bond, James Bond."
What a horrible, HORRIBLE idea. It would have killed the tension altogether.
#36
Posted 18 November 2008 - 05:47 PM
And she's an agent too. She knows the score. And things would instantly add up in her mind.A total stranger with a gun has broken into the apartment and told this girl the man she loves is actually a cold hearted, lying bastard... she believes him without question, says 'thank you' and calmly walks out?
Without question? Hardly. He completely nails her occupation and status - clearly he's a guy who has her situation sussed. The fist questions that would have come to mind are answered before they're asked.
At which point, especially after being shown the necklace, she need only look at the relationship to date. How Yusef found her, seduced her. You don't need five minutes of dialogue about how she always felt something wasn't quite right - the 'thank you' tells you everything.
Plus: Bond's a guy with a gun. She's not going to run off and cry, she's also going to call her agency. Eventually they'll prove what she knows in her gut is right, but in the meantime she's been allowed out from under gunpoint to do so. For a girl who, like Vesper, probably isn't used to being in that kind of position too often, she is grateful for the mercy.
AND THE NECKLACE WAS THE KEY! THAT was what made her believe BOND.
#37
Posted 18 November 2008 - 05:53 PM
#38
Posted 18 November 2008 - 05:57 PM
Unless I missed it, how did Bond know where Yusef was to find him at the end?
#39
Posted 18 November 2008 - 07:25 PM
The other is provided by QOS. A truly incredible ending and, for me, so utterly satisfying. The canadian agent whisphered thank you is amongst the most economic yet powerful scenes I've seen in years.
I never left? Of course you didn't. Everyone left you. Bond is the constant.
Wonderful ending.
#40
Posted 18 November 2008 - 07:39 PM
#41
Posted 19 November 2008 - 05:51 AM
#42
Posted 19 November 2008 - 04:19 PM
Ouch, pinch my arm. I couldn't disagree further. Firstly, there isn't a thing wrong comparing Dalton to Craig, seeing as how those were (at least to me) the most faithful to Fleming's original perception of the character. He's cold, cruel, makes the occasional quip (but is far from being a clown), and makes his missions personal. The way that Glen handled the interrogation scene in The Living Daylights is, I believe, the finest moment for Dalton. In this scene he is a vicious brute looking to get the answers he needs, the sneer in his lips paralleling his anger towards Pushkin. He's calm, albeit ready to pull the trigger if need be. But at this point in the film series, it's been established he's a seasoned agent who uses his brain as well as his trigger finger.Marc Forster was handed an ending that had a lot of meaning and substance, and he blew it. There was no mood created and Craig looked like Dalton as opposed to how he acquitted himself in the beginning of Casino Royal. Campbell took a scene where there was no history with the participants and made into something of substance all because he got the mood and acting right. Imaging the impact if Quantum’s ending had the same feel of the beginning of Casino Royal. Forster has joined the list of directors who obviously never got what Bond was. Thanks for your crappy interpretation Marc.
I think many of us can make the point that if you put Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace together as one movie, you see a full evolution of Bond. He's wet behind the ears while chasing the bombmaker in Africa but, as both films progress, he starts to realize that he can't always kill his leads. I think the scene where Bond clashes with Mr. Slate in Haiti demonstrates this point a tad. After Bond kills Slate, Craig just gets this look in his eyes. What did I do? I didn't get what I needed. Those next moments in Slate's hotel room are a great bit of acting from Craig as he searches for anything he can use. By the time Bond has extracted all the information that Greene has, he's seen the chaos that can come from the line of work he is in. As Bond and Camille are about to be burned alive, I think both their reactions to the panic around them is fantastic. That last scene, with Bond coldly and calmly aiming his PPK at Yusef and explaining everything he knows - this is the Bond we all know and love. As Pushin remarked in The Living Daylights, "You are professional. You do not kill without reason." Now that Bond has found his quantum of solace, he knows the difference between being rational and being quick. I think the ending is perfect and sets up the future Bonds as arguably the closest we've come to see Fleming's Bond on screen.
Edited by JerryRebes, 19 November 2008 - 04:25 PM.
#43
Posted 19 November 2008 - 04:28 PM
I think many of us can make the point that if you put Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace together as one movie, you see a full evolution of Bond. He's wet behind the ears while chasing the bombmaker in Africa but, as both films progress, he starts to realize that he can't always kill his leads. I think the scene where Bond clashes with Mr. Slate in Haiti demonstrates this point a tad. After Bond kills Slate, Craig just gets this look in his eyes. What did I do? I didn't get what I needed. Those next moments in Slate's hotel room are a great bit of acting from Craig as he searches for anything he can use. By the time Bond has extracted all the information that Greene has, he's seen the chaos that can come from the line of work he is in. As Bond and Camille are about to be burned alive, I think both their reactions to the panic around them is fantastic. That last scene, with Bond coldly and calmly aiming his PPK at Yusef and explaining everything he knows - this is the Bond we all know and love. As Pushin remarked in The Living Daylights, "You are professional. You do not kill without reason." Now that Bond has found his quantum of solace, he knows the difference between being rational and being quick. I think the ending is perfect and sets up the future Bonds as arguably the closest we've come to see Fleming's Bond on screen.
Agreed. Thats what I was trying to get at in my stillborn thread on Bond's character arc. By the end of QoS Bond sees the bigger picture and is going after the people behind the spies. Yusef doesn't matter. Its straight from the final chapter of CR - but amplified across a whole film.
#44
Posted 19 November 2008 - 05:03 PM
Terrance Young and Martin Campbell got it right whereas Marc Forster has now joined John Glen in the group of directors who got it wrong. Connery’s killing scene in Dr. No was the single scene that set Connery firmly in the character. The set up, filming, lighting and mood were perfect. In addition, Connery’s casualness/ruthlessness was perfect. Campbell duplicated this in the beginning of Casino Royal, creating the right mood, with Craig also killing his subject from the seated position.
John Glen had the same opportunity in the Living Daylights when Dalton was about to assassinate M’s counterpart in the KGB. Instead of taking the time to create the mood and showing a darker side of the character, he rushed through it, having Dalton look stiff and uneasy.
Marc Forster was handed an ending that had a lot of meaning and substance, and he blew it. There was no mood created and Craig looked like Dalton as opposed to how he acquitted himself in the beginning of Casino Royal. Campbell took a scene where there was no history with the participants and made into something of substance all because he got the mood and acting right. Imaging the impact if Quantum’s ending had the same feel of the beginning of Casino Royal.
Forster has joined the list of directors who obviously never got what Bond was. Thanks for your crappy interpretation Marc.
I have no idea what this post is about. Are you trying to hint by allowing Bond to kill in cold blood, as he had done in "DR. NO", it makes the Bond character look cool? Or is it something else?
By the way, the scene in which Bond faked Pushkin's death in THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS is one of my favorites in the franchise.
#45
Posted 19 November 2008 - 06:34 PM
#46
Posted 19 November 2008 - 06:40 PM
No, but honestly I don’t think it could have. CASINO ROYALE’S ending is a top-3 ending of all time in any film for me. After witnessing 45 years of James Bond form right before my very eyes, not much else even has a chance.I liked the "I never left" ending, but I didn't feel it as deep as the Casino Royale one.
The final line of QOS pales in comparison, but I think if I give it some time to escape the shadow of the still-very-recent CR, it’ll prove to be fairly awesome.
#47
Posted 19 November 2008 - 08:05 PM
#48
Posted 19 November 2008 - 08:34 PM
#49
Posted 19 November 2008 - 08:39 PM
#50
Posted 19 November 2008 - 08:54 PM
I'm not sure Property of a Lady will ever make it as a film title. You might have said the same about Quantum of Solace before Bond 22, but that at least has as "spy movie" kind of rhetoric about it. Property of a Lady is classy, but sounds a bit too...well, almost dainty to be a Bond film.
Yes...but thats why I quite like it...its different. Somehow I feel it could be the title to a real definitive Bond epic. Anyway, back on topic...
#51
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:47 PM
#52
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:55 PM
I love Judi Dench as M, but does anyone think she was in this one a bit too much?
#53
Posted 19 November 2008 - 10:11 PM
Not a bad point, Dave. I'll chew on that a bit, but I think you're right. Not sure why M needs to be hanging around (except, of course, to instigate Bond's final line of dialogue). It doesn't even look like they drove together, 'cause Bond goes walking off into the night without her!I think the ending is fine. It completes the Vesper story arc. I don't necessarily think that M needed to be there. It's a bit like a parent dropping their child off at a party and waiting outside and then asking "Did you have a good time?" when they come out.

Having said that, "no". I think for the first time Dench's M wasn't too much. The M/Bond relationship in QOS is more palatable than ever before. I would still prefer a change of actor, but in this last outing we get a more suitable version of the character.I love Judi Dench as M, but does anyone think she was in this one a bit too much?
#54
Posted 19 November 2008 - 10:18 PM
#55
Posted 20 November 2008 - 01:50 AM
#56
Posted 20 November 2008 - 01:52 AM
Especially Craig's delivery of the final line. It was perfect; I doubt any of the other actors could have come close.
Agreed. Craig's delivery of that line was quite good, and he's now two for two as far as having terrific endings to his films. I wonder what kind of ending they're going to come up with for Bond 23 to top the last two we've seen.
#57
Posted 20 November 2008 - 07:19 AM
Yeah, I agree. The only time Those Immortal Words would have worked would be when Bond confronted Yusuf alone; something like this ...For me it would have been great if when the female Canadian agent walks out & embarrasing says 'thank You", says instead, "who are you", and DC says "Bond, James Bond."
What a horrible, HORRIBLE idea. It would have killed the tension altogether.
Yusuf: "Who do you think you are, coming in here like this?"
Bond: "My name is Bond, James Bond. You don't know me - few do - but I know you, Yusuf Kabira. And if you want to keep breathing, you're going to tell me everything you know, starting with what you had planned for that Canadian girl ..."
... OR ...
Yusuf: "Who do you think you are, coming in here like this?"
Bond: "My name is Bond, James Bond. You killed my lover. Prepare to die!"
#58
Posted 20 November 2008 - 08:00 AM
Especially Craig's delivery of the final line. It was perfect; I doubt any of the other actors could have come close.
Agreed. Craig's delivery of that line was quite good, and he's now two for two as far as having terrific endings to his films. I wonder what kind of ending they're going to come up with for Bond 23 to top the last two we've seen.
Can't wait to see Qos with original sound. Though I loved the actor's voice who dubbed Dan here.
As 4 the ending scene. The most powerful part for me is definately the silent part when they just look at each other. Bond said just enough and there's no need for a lengthy dialogue or monologue from both of them. The viewer is given a chance to think it over for himself. That's what I probably love most about Qos is it's quite minimalistic and requires a viewer's ability to think and reflect.
#59
Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:13 AM
I think QoS is an underrated film, and this scene highlights the reason. The negative review I read don't seem to get that this is a character story, and this scene is. M's line, "Did you find what you were looking for?", is, I believe, the direct reference to the title, as well as the period on the sentence of this character arc.
That scene actually completes several character arcs. In the course of 2 movies, he has:
- learned to use kill with relative ease, but learns to question before he kills
- asserted his loyalty to his job over all else -- which is presented as sad in a way, but true to Ian Fleming's Bond
- laid Vesper's memory to rest -- but remains with a complex (including a bit of guilt?) about saving damsels in distress.
He is now ready to become the Bond we recognize. Hence the gunbarrel at the end. Bring on Bond 23, and "let the mayhem begin."
I actually think Ian Fleming would have approved of this story arc.
#60
Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:11 PM
Absolutely. I was struck by something else: Camille, the Canadian agent, has very little dialogue (only a whispered "thank you" as she leaves), but we see in her facial expressions, and so does Bond, everything that Vesper went through in the entirety of "Casino Royale": She starts out happily in love, then the shock sets in as she realizes she's been deceived, and we see fear, despair, shame and resignation overwhelm her, all in a few seconds. I thought that was absolutely brilliant.As 4 the ending scene. The most powerful part for me is definately the silent part when they just look at each other. Bond said just enough and there's no need for a lengthy dialogue or monologue from both of them. The viewer is given a chance to think it over for himself. That's what I probably love most about Qos is it's quite minimalistic and requires a viewer's ability to think and reflect.