74 replies to this topic

[MajorB]

While watching the QoS DVD, I discovered that if I set the speed control at 0.9x, some of the more frenetic and hard-to-follow action scenes become a lot easier to take in. Most conspicuous for me was the opening car chase. At nine-tenths speed, it came across to me like a "normal" action scene, and I could easily follow what was going on. None of it seemed artifically slow--it just seemed right. The Sienna chase is another outstanding example. It helped several other scenes as well, but the improvement seemed most dramatic in those two...oh, and in the fact that I now see the moment where Bond stabs Slate.

The only drawback is the sound--it gets a little bit choppy (at least on my player), and of course the music is slower, which is a little odd if you've listened to the ST a lot, as I have. But to me, it's definitely worth the sacrifice.

Still doesn't help the ending of the boat chase to make any sense, though...

[Mr. Blofeld]

What DVD system do you use? I've got Panasonic.

[MajorB]

My DVD player's a Sony (appropriately enough). It can incrementally speed up or slow down in increments of 0.1, from 0.6x to 1.4x. Not a feature I've found especially useful...till now.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Ahhh...

Makes me wonder: Anybody else have this feature (or something like it) on their DVD players?

[007Bond007]

Ohh yea, I remeber reading on the back of the dvd case that you have to lower to increments of .9 to get the full affect, when watching QOS

Edited by 007Bond007, 21 April 2009 - 07:33 PM.

[jaguar007]

I found just seeing the boat chase on a smaller screed helped me understand what was happening better.

[DaveBond21]

I found myself slowing down the Siena rooftop chase and the boat chase in Haiti to get a better understanding of what had happened.

[volante]

They say confesion is good for the soul.
I too have watched the car chase at a slower speed.
There is so much good acting (Craig's reactions) and excellent action going on that is just too fast to take in during the normal running speed.

Still, it is a great scene whatever the speed

[Double-0-7]

Now I have something more to do on my DVD player, thanks for the great idea!

[Zorin Industries]

While watching the QoS DVD, I discovered that if I set the speed control at 0.9x, some of the more frenetic and hard-to-follow action scenes become a lot easier to take in. Most conspicuous for me was the opening car chase. At nine-tenths speed, it came across to me like a "normal" action scene, and I could easily follow what was going on. None of it seemed artifically slow--it just seemed right. The Sienna chase is another outstanding example. It helped several other scenes as well, but the improvement seemed most dramatic in those two...oh, and in the fact that I now see the moment where Bond stabs Slate.

The only drawback is the sound--it gets a little bit choppy (at least on my player), and of course the music is slower, which is a little odd if you've listened to the ST a lot, as I have. But to me, it's definitely worth the sacrifice.

Still doesn't help the ending of the boat chase to make any sense, though...

Fine. Watch a film in slo-mo if that is your thing (I would get out of the house a little more myself first).

"The only drawback is the sound"....?!!! Yeah - funny that. What were Eon thinking releasing a film whose soundtracks were not able to be slowed down and still be pitch perfect.

Is this on a par with watching a Brosnan Bond film, squinting your eyes and pretending it is Dalton?

If you don't understand the boat chase in SOLACE, find the car chase better in slo-mo and generally find things to be more understandable at a speed NO-ONE intended then it does beg the question - why buy a film you didn't like in the way nearly one thousand crew, cast and studio workers intended it to be?

SOLACE was made like it was because that was what the director intended. Get used to it folks. There is not one producer or director alive who will say they had enough time to do it "properly", and it seems there is not one narrow minded SOLACE hater alive who cannot leave something they don't like alone and just move on.

[JimmyBond]

Well said. If there was a clapping emoticon I would definately be using it now

[blueman]

Just more evidence, EON doesn't make Bond films for Bond fans.

[HildebrandRarity]

At least you got your two hour bond film. Well done.

[Mister Asterix]

Just more evidence, EON doesn't make Bond films for Bond fans.

Sometimes I think Ian Fleming rising from the grave and typing his ultimate James Bond masterpiece would not be ‘for Bond fans’.

[MajorB]

While watching the QoS DVD, I discovered that if I set the speed control at 0.9x, some of the more frenetic and hard-to-follow action scenes become a lot easier to take in. Most conspicuous for me was the opening car chase. At nine-tenths speed, it came across to me like a "normal" action scene, and I could easily follow what was going on. None of it seemed artifically slow--it just seemed right. The Sienna chase is another outstanding example. It helped several other scenes as well, but the improvement seemed most dramatic in those two...oh, and in the fact that I now see the moment where Bond stabs Slate.

The only drawback is the sound--it gets a little bit choppy (at least on my player), and of course the music is slower, which is a little odd if you've listened to the ST a lot, as I have. But to me, it's definitely worth the sacrifice.

Still doesn't help the ending of the boat chase to make any sense, though...

Fine. Watch a film in slo-mo if that is your thing (I would get out of the house a little more myself first).

"The only drawback is the sound"....?!!! Yeah - funny that. What were Eon thinking releasing a film whose soundtracks were not able to be slowed down and still be pitch perfect.

Is this on a par with watching a Brosnan Bond film, squinting your eyes and pretending it is Dalton?

If you don't understand the boat chase in SOLACE, find the car chase better in slo-mo and generally find things to be more understandable at a speed NO-ONE intended then it does beg the question - why buy a film you didn't like in the way nearly one thousand crew, cast and studio workers intended it to be?

SOLACE was made like it was because that was what the director intended. Get used to it folks. There is not one producer or director alive who will say they had enough time to do it "properly", and it seems there is not one narrow minded SOLACE hater alive who cannot leave something they don't like alone and just move on.

Zorin, I don't hate the film. I like the film a lot. But I dislike the editing style in some scenes and sometimes found the action hard to follow, and was happy to share a way in which other folks who felt the same way might enhance their enjoyment of those scenes--as several people in this thread have obviously done. And I wasn't saying that the sound should magically have been optimized for all speeds--I was just noting the choppiness as a fact.

I don't think any of what I said merits your derisive tone. I think it's great that you're passionate about the film. (So am I, I just have a somewhat different opinion about it than you.) And I also think it's great that you have such a strong desire to defend it. But it's possible to do that without insulting people.

[JimmyBond]

If I may speak for Zorin, I think his tone is just fine. I find it insulting that anyone would alter someone else's work in order to make it better.

[PositivelyShocking]

It's kind of sad that people need to put entire sequences into slow-motion just to obtain a basic understanding of them. Even when I watch QOS on DVD, whenever I blink during an action sequence I feel like I've missed something. Poor, poor filmmaking.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Now, now; let's not bicker, folks. We've got to agree that both sides have good points, but there's no use in pointing fingers at one another when that's clearly what they haven't been saying all this time.

Jimmy, I love QOS, too, but I expected a better tone from you. PositivelyShocking, you're probably a new user, so could you please provide some more rationale (besides blink-speeds) that indicates exactly how QOS is, in your words, "poor, poor filmmaking" ? Let's all buck up, people.

[JimmyBond]

I find altering work of any form a tad offensive. So when I posted what I did I was just speaking how I felt about the idea that someone had to alter someone else's work to better understand it. My tone wasnt meant to come off as negative in any way.

[Jim]

While watchingwell, but the improvement the QoS DVD, I discovered that if I set the speed control at 0.9x, some of the more frenetic and But to me,hard-to-follow action scenes become a lot easier to take in. dramatic in those two...oh, and in the opening car chase. At nine-tenths speed, it came across to me like a "normal" action Nonesound--it gets a little bit choppy (at least on my player), and of course Most conspicuous for me fact that I now see the moment where Bond stabs Slate.

is slower, whichis the was the of it seemed artifically slow--it just seemed right. The Sienna chasStill doesn't help the ending of the boat chase toThe only drawback scenes as seemed most scene, and I could easily follow what was going on.the music make any sense, though... :)e is another outstanding example. It helped several other is a little odd if you've listened to the ST a lot, as I have. it's definitely worth the sacrifice.

I decided to re-edit your work. Suits me better that way. Obviously I'm not now reading it as you intended but stuff that; this is all about me.

Monkey about with Quantum of Solace all you wish but you won't have watched Quantum of Solace when you're done; it'll be something else entirely.

[bond 16.05.72]

Personally I couldn't be arsed with doing that myself, some of you obviously have a lot of spare time on your hands unlike me but the tone that those of us who didn't appreciate the editing style of QOS don't understand film is getting a little grating in fact it's getting damn right annoying.

I understood it fine thank you but I'm afraid this style is not for me and you won't see it in Bond 23 that is for sure however much Zorin keeps defending it.

[Zorin Industries]

I find this thread a lot better if you speed it up.

Even when I watch QOS on DVD, whenever I blink during an action sequence I feel like I've missed something.

I agree. They should have used just one static camera mounted at eye height and created the tension and split second urgency of the action scenes in SOLACE by waving a signpost saying "Action Scene! Danger implied" as using the very tools of cinema - i.e. editing - is clearly ruining cinema for people who want their action scenes to hold the urgency of RETURN TO WITCH MOUNTAIN.

[DamnCoffee]

While watching the QoS DVD, I discovered that if I set the speed control at 0.9x, some of the more frenetic and hard-to-follow action scenes become a lot easier to take in.

Perhaps a link to an example would suffice?

[The Shark]

While watching the QoS DVD, I discovered that if I set the speed control at 0.9x, some of the more frenetic and hard-to-follow action scenes become a lot easier to take in. Most conspicuous for me was the opening car chase. At nine-tenths speed, it came across to me like a "normal" action scene, and I could easily follow what was going on. None of it seemed artifically slow--it just seemed right. The Sienna chase is another outstanding example. It helped several other scenes as well, but the improvement seemed most dramatic in those two...oh, and in the fact that I now see the moment where Bond stabs Slate.

The only drawback is the sound--it gets a little bit choppy (at least on my player), and of course the music is slower, which is a little odd if you've listened to the ST a lot, as I have. But to me, it's definitely worth the sacrifice.

Still doesn't help the ending of the boat chase to make any sense, though...

Fine. Watch a film in slo-mo if that is your thing (I would get out of the house a little more myself first).

"The only drawback is the sound"....?!!! Yeah - funny that. What were Eon thinking releasing a film whose soundtracks were not able to be slowed down and still be pitch perfect.

Is this on a par with watching a Brosnan Bond film, squinting your eyes and pretending it is Dalton?

If you don't understand the boat chase in SOLACE, find the car chase better in slo-mo and generally find things to be more understandable at a speed NO-ONE intended then it does beg the question - why buy a film you didn't like in the way nearly one thousand crew, cast and studio workers intended it to be?

SOLACE was made like it was because that was what the director intended. Get used to it folks. There is not one producer or director alive who will say they had enough time to do it "properly", and it seems there is not one narrow minded SOLACE hater alive who cannot leave something they don't like alone and just move on.

Correction: Why buy a film you didn't like in the way that Dan Bradly, a few editors, and Marc Forster intended it to be?
I doubt you'd find that the majority of the producers, crew, cast and studio workers intended it to be the way it inded up.

I doubt Forster intended the film's editing phase to be just 6 weeks, when he usually has 14 to cut and preview the the film in it's various versions.
I also doubt the producers intended the writers strike to take place, resulting in constant revisions to a dis-jointed messy script. I doubt they intended the film to recieve largely mixed reives, considearing that they constantly meantioned topping Casino Royale.

[Zorin Industries]

While watching the QoS DVD, I discovered that if I set the speed control at 0.9x, some of the more frenetic and hard-to-follow action scenes become a lot easier to take in. Most conspicuous for me was the opening car chase. At nine-tenths speed, it came across to me like a "normal" action scene, and I could easily follow what was going on. None of it seemed artifically slow--it just seemed right. The Sienna chase is another outstanding example. It helped several other scenes as well, but the improvement seemed most dramatic in those two...oh, and in the fact that I now see the moment where Bond stabs Slate.

The only drawback is the sound--it gets a little bit choppy (at least on my player), and of course the music is slower, which is a little odd if you've listened to the ST a lot, as I have. But to me, it's definitely worth the sacrifice.

Still doesn't help the ending of the boat chase to make any sense, though...

Fine. Watch a film in slo-mo if that is your thing (I would get out of the house a little more myself first).

"The only drawback is the sound"....?!!! Yeah - funny that. What were Eon thinking releasing a film whose soundtracks were not able to be slowed down and still be pitch perfect.

Is this on a par with watching a Brosnan Bond film, squinting your eyes and pretending it is Dalton?

If you don't understand the boat chase in SOLACE, find the car chase better in slo-mo and generally find things to be more understandable at a speed NO-ONE intended then it does beg the question - why buy a film you didn't like in the way nearly one thousand crew, cast and studio workers intended it to be?

SOLACE was made like it was because that was what the director intended. Get used to it folks. There is not one producer or director alive who will say they had enough time to do it "properly", and it seems there is not one narrow minded SOLACE hater alive who cannot leave something they don't like alone and just move on.

Correction: Why buy a film you didn't like in the way that Dan Bradly, a few editors, and Marc Forster intended it to be?
I doubt you'd find that the majority of the producers, crew, cast and studio workers intended it to be the way it inded up.

I doubt Forster intended the film's editing phase to be just 6 weeks, when he usually has 14 to cut and preview the the film in it's various versions.
I also doubt the producers intended the writers strike to take place, resulting in constant revisions to a dis-jointed messy script. I doubt they intended the film to recieve largely mixed reives, considearing that they constantly meantioned topping Casino Royale.

The film would have started editing before the shoot had finished. So that is not really six weeks. Be careful taking on board literally what people say in press junkets and Q&A's. Two months ago Michael Wilson was noted as saying Eon are taking a break from BOND. A month later a press release outlines who is writing BOND 23. The work to get to that point does not happen if people are really taking that break.

Who said the script was disjointed and messy?

"Largely mixed reviews"....? ALL Bond films get largely mixed reviews.

They did top CASINO ROYALE. But not in the way some people hoped or expected. SOLACE is the tonal, emotional, stylistic and insightful superior film by a long stretch. There was no way SOLACE was going to be all about long scenes on trains featuring Eva Green.

And were you there in every script meeting, location recce, editing suite and tone debate that BOND 22 had in the two years of its production? The film was the way it was not because the editors didn't have enough time. It was the way it turned out because that is exactly the way those involved (more or less - you never get it the way you want it 100%) wanted it to be that way.

The writers strike was touted for months. It was no surprise. And certainly not to Eon who have past experience with such conditions during a Bond shoot.

And NO director or producer gets enough time. "Time" appears to be the domain of people who dislike a film SOOOO much that they keep watching it in order to tell themselves that.

[Double-Oh Agent]

"Largely mixed reviews"....? ALL Bond films get largely mixed reviews.

Not all. Just to name one, Casino Royale got nearly unanimous praise when it came out. It got a 94 percent fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes--the highest rated Hollywood (read non-independent) film of the year--and received a similar amount of praise from most movie-goers. Neither of which occurred with Quantum Of Solace. The reviews were mixed from film critics and while Solace does have its hard-core backers from audience members, there are many falling on the other side of the fence that dislike the film. I'll grant that they're maybe not an equal number, but they are a sizable amount--and an amount that dwarfs the Casino Royale naysayers.

[Zorin Industries]

"Largely mixed reviews"....? ALL Bond films get largely mixed reviews.

Not all. Just to name one, Casino Royale got nearly unanimous praise when it came out. It got a 94 percent fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes--the highest rated Hollywood (read non-independent) film of the year--and received a similar amount of praise from most movie-goers. Neither of which occurred with Quantum Of Solace. The reviews were mixed from film critics and while Solace does have its hard-core backers from audience members, there are many falling on the other side of the fence that dislike the film. I'll grant that they're maybe not an equal number, but they are a sizable amount--and an amount that dwarfs the Casino Royale naysayers.

Er - no - CASINO ROYALE did not get "unanimous praise".

TIME MAGAZINE :
"This is a Bond with great body but no soul"

That would be wrong to suggest that in the same way it is wrong to suggest SOLACE was disliked by all critics (it wasn't at all).

Besides, reviews of Bond films are sort of redundant and have been since some people criticised FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. Bond doesn't need reviews.

And I hate to burst your bubble (or your tomato) but RottenTomatoes is a benchmark of absolutely nothing. It has no industry standing, and is only a tool for film boys to tell each other they are right. And you need to be careful when using blanket statements like "most movie goers" as unless you have interviewed all of them, generalisations replace fact and your opinions replace the consensus. And I mean that about any film, not just ROYALE - which I highly rate and love, by the way.

[The Shark]

"Largely mixed reviews"....? ALL Bond films get largely mixed reviews.

Not all. Just to name one, Casino Royale got nearly unanimous praise when it came out. It got a 94 percent fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes--the highest rated Hollywood (read non-independent) film of the year--and received a similar amount of praise from most movie-goers. Neither of which occurred with Quantum Of Solace. The reviews were mixed from film critics and while Solace does have its hard-core backers from audience members, there are many falling on the other side of the fence that dislike the film. I'll grant that they're maybe not an equal number, but they are a sizable amount--and an amount that dwarfs the Casino Royale naysayers.

Er - no - CASINO ROYALE did not get "unanimous praise".

TIME MAGAZINE :
"This is a Bond with great body but no soul"

That would be wrong to suggest that in the same way it is wrong to suggest SOLACE was disliked by all critics (it wasn't at all).

Besides, reviews of Bond films are sort of redundant and have been since some people criticised FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. Bond doesn't need reviews.

And I hate to burst your bubble (or your tomato) but RottenTomatoes is a benchmark of absolutely nothing. It has no industry standing, and is only a tool for film boys to tell each other they are right. And you need to be careful when using blanket statements like "most movie goers" as unless you have interviewed all of them, generalisations replace fact and your opinions replace the consensus. And I mean that about any film, not just ROYALE - which I highly rate and love, by the way.

So your evidence for Casino Royale not receiving unanimous praise, is to quote ONE review? What next, finding a negative review from danielcraigisnotbond.com?

Again it's easy to find a negative review from 6% out of 94& positive, if you look hard enough. Despite the fact that "some" people criticised FRWL, doesn't detract from the fact that it received largely very positive reviews.

You need to be careful when using blanket statements such as "RottenTomatoes is a benchmark of absolutely nothing" - are unfounded and wholly opinionated statement, from an argument covered by by rodomontade and bravado, which ultimately signifies nothing.

[Zorin Industries]

"Largely mixed reviews"....? ALL Bond films get largely mixed reviews.

Not all. Just to name one, Casino Royale got nearly unanimous praise when it came out. It got a 94 percent fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes--the highest rated Hollywood (read non-independent) film of the year--and received a similar amount of praise from most movie-goers. Neither of which occurred with Quantum Of Solace. The reviews were mixed from film critics and while Solace does have its hard-core backers from audience members, there are many falling on the other side of the fence that dislike the film. I'll grant that they're maybe not an equal number, but they are a sizable amount--and an amount that dwarfs the Casino Royale naysayers.

Er - no - CASINO ROYALE did not get "unanimous praise".

TIME MAGAZINE :
"This is a Bond with great body but no soul"

That would be wrong to suggest that in the same way it is wrong to suggest SOLACE was disliked by all critics (it wasn't at all).

Besides, reviews of Bond films are sort of redundant and have been since some people criticised FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. Bond doesn't need reviews.

And I hate to burst your bubble (or your tomato) but RottenTomatoes is a benchmark of absolutely nothing. It has no industry standing, and is only a tool for film boys to tell each other they are right. And you need to be careful when using blanket statements like "most movie goers" as unless you have interviewed all of them, generalisations replace fact and your opinions replace the consensus. And I mean that about any film, not just ROYALE - which I highly rate and love, by the way.

So your evidence for Casino Royale not receiving unanimous praise, is to quote ONE review? What next, finding a negative review from danielcraigisnotbond.com?

Again it's easy to find a negative review from 6% out of 94& positive, if you look hard enough. Despite the fact that "some" people criticised FRWL, doesn't detract from the fact that it received largely very positive reviews.

You need to be careful when using blanket statements such as "RottenTomatoes is a benchmark of absolutely nothing" - are unfounded and wholly opinionated statement, from an argument covered by by rodomontade and bravado, which ultimately signifies nothing.

Please. Petty and infantile responses do not constitute decent discussion.

No. RottenTomatoes is a benchmark of nothing. I say that from my own perspective as a professional in a slightly related industry who knows that such online fanboy activity is benign and unconnected to how things really operate. Sorry. But that is how it is.

I ain't here to outline every negative ROYALE review. But there were a few. And because the reviews have very little standing to the films (NOTE TO SOLACE HATERS : check out the DVD / BluRay sales - where people have the choice to come back after seeing it at the cinema) it is futile relaying them here. And by the way, Rotten Tomatoes percentage way of classifying a film is only ONE opinion itself based on data that other people (i.e. reviewers) have worked on. I have no time for such geekery riding the backs of professionals doing their jobs. What is this "6% of 94% nonsense"...?! It means nothing. Absolutely zilch. Why do online film fans get so obsessed by something like Rotten Tomatoes? Oh I know. It is because it helps ill-informed people look the exact opposite.

[David_M]

If you don't understand the boat chase in SOLACE, find the car chase better in slo-mo and generally find things to be more understandable at a speed NO-ONE intended then it does beg the question - why buy a film you didn't like in the way nearly one thousand crew, cast and studio workers intended it to be?

Hear, hear.

Exactly why I'm not buying the DVD. If they can't make a film to suit you, why waste all that effort trying to alter reality?

Says the guy who can't get through TWINE without the fast-forward button.