How will QoS reputation change now that is on DVD?
#241
Posted 22 May 2009 - 02:34 PM
Paul
#242
Posted 22 May 2009 - 04:50 PM
What you call "overpraising" is, simply, your opinion. Some of us just really do enjoy the film, and so of course we're going to defend it against complaints from those like yourself who, IMO, are overly negative. But, of course, that's my opinion, too.The point is that I don't hate QOS, what I do hate is the overpraising, that IMO has received in this site, by some hardcore fans that seem that they're not very in touch with the reality outside the fandom- and I believe that only here has happened this-.
And, FWIW, I would not describe myself as a "hardcore" fan. For me, the series has been hit or miss, and I didn't really climb on board the fan train till I saw "The Living Daylights" and realized that Dalton's take on the character was what I'd been wanting to see in Bond all along. So, naturally, Craig's interpretation of the character resonates with me, and while "Casino" is what made me a fan, "Quantum" is what confirmed it. Obviously you are not going to agree, but that's a simple difference of opinion. Characterizing it as anything more is simply grandstanding to try to reinforce your own opinion. And we can all go around in that circle forever and ever, but in the end, it proves nothing more than I like the film, and can defend my reasons why, whereas you don't and can defend your reasons why. That's what it all boils down to.
#243
Posted 22 May 2009 - 04:51 PM
Hate the overpraising??? On a fansite? For a film that made $575 mil worldwide? You serious?The point is that I don't hate QOS, what I do hate is the overpraising, that IMO has received in this site, by some hardcore fans that seem that they're not very in touch with the reality outside the fandom- and I believe that only here has happened this-.
Again, $575 mil worldwide, so taking the line that no one cares about QOS outside of a few rabid fanboys is all straw. With that kinda profit it's popular enough to be rank anywhere in the franchise - heck some people rank TSWLM at the top of their Bond list, and sure it made a ton of money but I don't count it as a Bond film myself, too much light-hearted anti-Flemingness for my taste.In my consideration, QOS is just an average Bond movie far from the worst, and far from the best either, so I have a hard time to understand how some people put this Forster's work in the same league of Bond classics or even above of them, when almost nobody, outside this forum, really care about this movie, unlike CR or TSWLM, just to quote very popular Bond movies after the Bondmania-.
Hang on... some fans do rank TSWLM that highly, and I don't think of it as a true Bond film. Excuse me, but I don't have time for this anymore, I have to go jihad all over the Moore section of the forum and explain to some very ignorant fanboys people why light-hearted bond isn't true Bond. Have a nice day.
#244
Posted 22 May 2009 - 05:10 PM
I have no immediate plans to ever watch it again. Maybe in a year or so.
#245
Posted 22 May 2009 - 05:21 PM
And again... as I said earlier those $575 mil worldwide doesn't prove that much on popularity with general audience- ratings on sites like imdb for instance, are a better, albeit not exact, indication of that-, because those numbers were mainly prompted by the opening weeks results, which are pretty much a consequence of the success of their predecessor (you know, the direct sequel advertising), thing that is proved by the fast decline in the numbers after the subsequents weeks, unlike CR, which had longer legs at its time.Hate the overpraising??? On a fansite? For a film that made $575 mil worldwide? You serious?The point is that I don't hate QOS, what I do hate is the overpraising, that IMO has received in this site, by some hardcore fans that seem that they're not very in touch with the reality outside the fandom- and I believe that only here has happened this-.
Again, $575 mil worldwide, so taking the line that no one cares about QOS outside of a few rabid fanboys is all straw. With that kinda profit it's popular enough to be rank anywhere in the franchiseIn my consideration, QOS is just an average Bond movie far from the worst, and far from the best either, so I have a hard time to understand how some people put this Forster's work in the same league of Bond classics or even above of them, when almost nobody, outside this forum, really care about this movie, unlike CR or TSWLM, just to quote very popular Bond movies after the Bondmania-.
If you want further proofs, you could read and compare the resumes of the best movies from the year 2006 with the ones from 2008, almost no-one mentions QOS in the latter. Almost the same goes for the awards.
Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 22 May 2009 - 05:30 PM.
#246
Posted 22 May 2009 - 07:23 PM
And again... as I said earlier those $575 mil worldwide doesn't prove that much on popularity with general audience-Hate the overpraising??? On a fansite? For a film that made $575 mil worldwide? You serious?The point is that I don't hate QOS, what I do hate is the overpraising, that IMO has received in this site, by some hardcore fans that seem that they're not very in touch with the reality outside the fandom- and I believe that only here has happened this-.
Again, $575 mil worldwide, so taking the line that no one cares about QOS outside of a few rabid fanboys is all straw. With that kinda profit it's popular enough to be rank anywhere in the franchiseIn my consideration, QOS is just an average Bond movie far from the worst, and far from the best either, so I have a hard time to understand how some people put this Forster's work in the same league of Bond classics or even above of them, when almost nobody, outside this forum, really care about this movie, unlike CR or TSWLM, just to quote very popular Bond movies after the Bondmania-.
If you say so.
#247
Posted 22 May 2009 - 08:11 PM
If you want further proofs, you could read and compare the resumes of the best movies from the year 2006 with the ones from 2008, almost no-one mentions QOS in the latter. Almost the same goes for the awards.
Here's a direct question for you. Why do you feel the need to put down QoS and it's supporters? It's only a Bond film, if some of us think it's the best what harm is that doing to you?
#248
Posted 23 May 2009 - 12:24 AM
I think the main problem with QOS have always been the problem since I saw it. I actually did the double bill thing with CR to see how they slot together, and in my opinion, right next to each other CR rose even further. QOS seems to me just the epilogue to a much greater film. Not one really badly made (though I have the issues, editing etc, that a lot of people have), but a film that ultimately just lacks a really strong story compared to CR. It just seems a minor bonus episode, until we make a proper story with the next film.
The story felt contrived only when tying the Yusef/Vesper relationship to both Greene's Bolivia plot and Camille's pursuit of Medrano. The Greene-Medrano and Camille-Medrano plots by themselves were no problem, but the screenwriters must have struggled somewhat in an effort to fit Bond into both cases. Perhaps Haggis/Neal/Purvis could have fleshed the beginning and ending out more, but it didn't affect the rest of the film, which was very good.
#249
Posted 28 May 2009 - 05:15 PM
Having just watched "Quantum of Solace" again, I wanted to correct this point. Bond actually lowers the gun at this moment.Bond moves the gun up,
#250
Posted 15 June 2009 - 06:35 AM