36 replies to this topic

[Lazenby]

In a word, NO. I did not wish to compare the 2 movies, but was told time and time again by the cast and crew that they had to make it better that Royal. I was then told that Forster was the right guy to direct because of his character development. Are you kidding me! I did not see it. I will watch the movie again to see if i missed some nuanced scenes that were good. If so, shame on Forster for watering those scenes down with recycled Brosnan action scenes. There was more substance in Bond/M scens in Casino Royal than in all of Quantum. Just a fact.

[Bondian]

You're not helping either you or your points, by making so many threads on the same subject.

[bondrules]

here we go again....

[Judo chop]

You know... this Lazenby guy is not unlike Quantum itself.

He’s been around for years, lurking, assimilating, plotting. And yet we’ve known nothing about him, until now…



Anybody have a can of motor oil handy?

[Matt_13]

Now you're just spamming, either settle down or you'll be facing a ban.

[dee-bee-five]

In a word, NO. I did not wish to compare the 2 movies, but was told time and time again by the cast and crew that they had to make it better that Royal. I was then told that Forster was the right guy to direct because of his character development. Are you kidding me! I did not see it. I will watch the movie again to see if i missed some nuanced scenes that were good. If so, shame on Forster for watering those scenes down with recycled Brosnan action scenes. There was more substance in Bond/M scens in Casino Royal than in all of Quantum. Just a fact.

What was it Hugo Drax said about turning up with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season...?

[zencat]

In a word, NO. I did not wish to compare the 2 movies, but was told time and time again by the cast and crew that they had to make it better that Royal. I was then told that Forster was the right guy to direct because of his character development. Are you kidding me! I did not see it. I will watch the movie again to see if i missed some nuanced scenes that were good. If so, shame on Forster for watering those scenes down with recycled Brosnan action scenes. There was more substance in Bond/M scens in Casino Royal than in all of Quantum. Just a fact.

Lazenby, certainly this is just a comment that belongs in one of the many threads about QOS or Forster. This is hardly a topic starter.

[spynovelfan]

You're not helping either you or your points, by making so many threads on the same subject.

Points?

[Bondian]

Something smells of cow here, and it's not me.

You're not helping either you or your points, by making so many threads on the same subject.

Points?

Meaning the points he's trying to put across.

[Lazenby]

This is just my humble opinion. I have given a well thought out explanation of my points. I then receive personal attacks which is easy to do over the net. I was told that I am small-minded, and could not follow this amazing movie. I don't subscribe to that theory.

[spynovelfan]

Something smells of cow here, and it's not me.

You're not helping either you or your points, by making so many threads on the same subject.

Points?

Meaning the points he's trying to put across.

I was suggesting you were being generous putting it in the plural: I only see one point, repeated ad infinitum across many threads.

[Lazenby]

I asked the question because I am curious about the members answers. I did not ask the question to receive insults, especially the oil comment which I'm quite confident would not be made to me in person.

[dee-bee-five]

I asked the question because I am curious about the members answers. I did not ask the question to receive insults, especially the oil comment which I'm quite confident would not be made to me in person.

I wouldn't go banco on that...

[Bondian]

Something smells of cow here, and it's not me.

You're not helping either you or your points, by making so many threads on the same subject.

Points?

Meaning the points he's trying to put across.

I was suggesting you were being generous putting it in the plural: I only see one point, repeated ad infinitum across many threads.

Ah. I see your point.

Have just read a couple of Lazenby's topics, so wasn't aware he was saying the same thing in other threads.

I asked the question because I am curious about the members answers. I did not ask the question to receive insults, especially the oil comment which I'm quite confident would not be made to me in person.

All you need to do is to stick to one thread to have your say.

[Mister Asterix]

Okay, taking Laz at his word that this is an inquisitive thread rather than another chance to say the same thing.


The answer is Yes. Very much so. In fact it surpasses Casino Royale in many aspects. Direction, pacing, art. Quantum of Solace mostly falls just short of Casino Royale because of Casino Royale’s tremendously emotional love story.

[bondrules]

I smell Hormel Spiced Ham.

[zencat]

The answer is Yes. Very much so. In fact it surpasses Casino Royale in many aspects. Direction, pacing, art. Quantum of Solace mostly falls just short of Casino Royale because of Casino Royale’s tremendously emotional love story.

I think I largely agree with that. And while I think CR is the better film (because of the emotion), I have a feeling when I want my Daniel Craig Bond fix, I'll reach for QOS first. It may be the better BOND film.

[Mister Asterix]

MODERATOR’S NOTE:

Either answer the question posed by the thread, comment about a specific thing said, or don’t post.

We are failing to see the point of continually bumping up a thread that you think spam by posting your thoughts that it is.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

The troubls is is that Lazenby is right. How could they have followed one of the best Bond films with probably the worst? However, even if it had been directly preceeded by Die Another Day it would still look shoddy.

[Mister Asterix]

I think I largely agree with that. And while I think CR is the better film (because of the emotion), I have a feeling when I want my Daniel Craig Bond fix, I'll reach for QOS first. It may be the better BOND film.

Wow. Yeah. I think I’ll probably do the same thing. Interesting.


MODERATOR NOTE: One post deleted so far.

[Judo chop]

Yes. QoS met expectations set forth by CR. Actually, it kind of side-stepped the expectations and met some other ones instead.

As Lazenby would say... just a fact. And also my humble opinion.

(Better?)

[Ravenstone]

The answer is Yes. Very much so. In fact it surpasses Casino Royale in many aspects. Direction, pacing, art. Quantum of Solace mostly falls just short of Casino Royale because of Casino Royale’s tremendously emotional love story.

I agree with most of that, except for the 'emotional love story' part. Not that it wasn't, just that it wasn't for me. That was the part I found most irritating about CR. Minor irritation, it has to be said, but it chafed none the less.

I much prefer the characters in QOS. Greene gives the impression that he would think of a particularly nasty way of killing someone rather than just getting someone else to stick poison in their drink. Le Chiffre is a great baddie, don't get me wrong, but he doesn't seem the hands on type. Or the inventive type. He's an accountant. Whereas Greene seems genuinely creepy.

[plankattack]

Do I look like a man who would start trouble......

Does QoS live up to CR. Hmmmmmm. Well, I think from seeing the finished product, it decided it wasn't going to try. Instead, it did something different. Clearly, it's not to everyone's taste, but it thankfully avoided the classic EON mistake of attempting to top the previous entry.

Does it live up to expectations? If your expectation was for another CR, then the answer is no. But for an entertaining film, I'm fulfilled by it. It's not my personal fave, but it's not the utter tosh some people claim it is.

And I think any Bond film is in atough position when compared to CR. CR was a big moment for the franchise, and for those of us who've sat through a lot of Bonds that never quite lived up to our wishes, CR was a thrilling, nostalgic, rush. I still remember sitting there thinking "this is the type of Bond I've always wanted up onscreen."

Is QoS that? No, but it shows that the series is attempting to grow and aspire to more than what it has in the past.

Edited by plankattack, 19 November 2008 - 10:29 PM.

[Matt_13]

I think Quantum does not allow scenes to outstay their welcome in the same way that Casino Royale occasionally does. Like I've said before, my biggest issue with CR is the drag produced basically from Bond's arrival at the Ocean Club to the the Montenegro Train. For some reason that whole portion of the film to me feels sort of off kilter with the rest of the proceedings. Even the Miami Airport scene, while it features great stunt work, does not have the same sense of urgency as the Parkour chase nor the Stairwell fight. With Quantum of Solace, we have an abundance of action sequences tightly edited and with the exception of the plane chase/freefall, all of which feel like part of the story as opposed to just another action scene for the sake of it. In terms of dialogue, Qos takes a more naturalistic approach to the conversations, featuring sharper wit and more tender emotions. The primary reason why I enjoy the film more than CR is that it never really feels like I'm watching actors or stuntmen, what I'm watching is the real deal and while CR will always be in my top 3, I don't see it topping Quantum in my book.

[dee-bee-five]

I think I largely agree with that. And while I think CR is the better film (because of the emotion), I have a feeling when I want my Daniel Craig Bond fix, I'll reach for QOS first. It may be the better BOND film.

Wow. Yeah. I think I’ll probably do the same thing. Interesting.


MODERATOR NOTE: One post deleted so far.

The same will probably go for me, too.

[Double-Oh Agent]

Not even close. Granted, matching the quality of Casino Royale was always going to be a difficult task. I had my doubts that it would happen, but I was hopeful. I stayed away from the spoilers as much as I could as well as reading the reviews. When I noticed that Quantum Of Solace had only 35 per cent approval on Rotten Tomatoes, I was slightly worried, but put it down mostly to the press' predilection for building people up and then tearing them down.

But upon seeing the film, there were just too many disappointments/things that didn't work for me to ignore. While I enjoyed QOS overall, it fell way short of the great Casino Royale.

[Jim]

I think I largely agree with that. And while I think CR is the better film (because of the emotion), I have a feeling when I want my Daniel Craig Bond fix, I'll reach for QOS first. It may be the better BOND film.

Wow. Yeah. I think I’ll probably do the same thing. Interesting.


MODERATOR NOTE: One post deleted so far.

The same will probably go for me, too.

Similarly.

[avl]

Yes, considerably.
Here's why. I didn't expect QoS to be another CR. No way it could have been, CR was a step change in quality for the franchise
What I expected was that QoS would continue CR's ambition for a Bond film to be more than just another Bond film, to try new things, new ways of telling the story, and move the franchise forward. And it more than met up to those expectations.

[Loomis]

Okay, taking Laz at his word that this is an inquisitive thread rather than another chance to say the same thing.


The answer is Yes. Very much so. In fact it surpasses Casino Royale in many aspects. Direction, pacing, art. Quantum of Solace mostly falls just short of Casino Royale because of Casino Royale’s tremendously emotional love story.

I think there's just as much "art" in CASINO ROYALE, indeed more so, and even better art. It certainly boasts more moments of striking visual beauty (to name but three, there's the B&W opening, the CU of the cocktail glasses in the casino, and that shot of Ivana Humpalot or whatever she's called staring out on the balcony of her suite). For me, CASINO ROYALE is the best-looking of all the Bonds, followed by YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE and then probably OHMSS and DR. NO. I don't think QUANTUM OF SOLACE really comes close.

I think Forster is often assumed to be an arty, sophisticated auteur director (I mean, he's bald, European and well-spoken, so obviously he has to be an artiste), while Campbell is dismissed as a mere hack. But if you look at their Bond films....

I like QUANTUM OF SOLACE, but I do think CASINO ROYALE trumps it (and most other 007 outings) in every possible way.

[Mister Asterix]

I think there's just as much "art" in CASINO ROYALE, indeed more so, and even better art. It certainly boasts more moments of striking visual beauty (to name but three, there's the B&W opening, the CU of the cocktail glasses in the casino, and that shot of Ivana Humpalot or whatever she's called staring out on the balcony of her suite). For me, CASINO ROYALE is the best-looking of all the Bonds, followed by YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE and then probably OHMSS and DR. NO. I don't think QUANTUM OF SOLACE really comes close.

I’m definitely not saying there is no art in Casino Royale. I just don’t see it as better than Quantum of Solace. The black & white you mention as an example. It felt like the someone simply turned the saturation down all the way and turned on the grain filter. I always wish they’d’ve gone all the way and filmed that on an old camera with black and white film. I think they would’ve in Quantum of Solace.

I think Forster is often assumed to be an arty, sophisticated auteur director (I mean, he's bald, European and well-spoken, so obviously he has to be an artiste), while Campbell is dismissed as a mere hack. But if you look at their Bond films....

I was judging the art by what was on the screen, not a haircut or a reputation. The sets in Quantum of Solace are beautifully stunning when compared to Lamont’s lasciviously decorated boxes.

I like QUANTUM OF SOLACE, but I do think CASINO ROYALE trumps it (and most other 007 outings) in every possible way.

Fair enough. I’m not trying to change your mind, I’m just trying to point out what I saw. To me Casino Royale is definitely the second best looking Bond film.