220 replies to this topic

[Judo chop]

I think it does. And it's welcome. But it has to be noticeable, while at the same time not being On the Nose™ - which is, of course, a difficult balancing act. Otherwise, it's all just fan conjecture.

Loomis, your Hitchcock vs. the Pope is an example of complete conjecture. Maybe it’s a sign, maybe’s it’s not, and we can never know until Hitchcock himself takes a side of the argument.

But my claims re: Elvis are not even remotely conjecture. Truly, I find any attempts proving him to be anything other than what I claim he is… laughable. Just look at the list. Observe Elvis in each and every moment he appears. Ridicule follows the character like a shadow.

You know what he is? He’s not even just the anti-henchman. He’s the anti-homage. What series in history is more guilty of making love to itself than Bond? Many times he seems to consist of more tribute than original material. Elvis enters the homage from the backdoor. Finally, an homage (noun) that doesn’t actually homage (verb).

I’m not one of those here who falls at the altar of Quantum of Solace. I’m not under any fanatic delusions. I do believe I have been genuine in my appraisals, and I have been calling it exactly as I see it. Just as there are parts of QOS that bomb, and parts that amble, there are parts that soar. Perhaps you do not find The Joke as funny as I do. Maybe you don’t think The Joke is really that clever. I don’t believe I’ve ever really tried to make the claim that Elvis is an absolute stroke of genius. If I have, I was hyperbolizing. I only really claim that Elvis is an original kind of funny for Bond, and to do something original in Bond after 40+ years of recycling material is no small feat. No small feat at all.

But to anyone who claims The Joke isn’t even there, I’ve got an extra-large SO! WRONG!™ bathrobe with your name on it. It's there. You can count on it.

[Harmsway]

I think what Judo sees in Elvis is ultimately there, but I personally don't find it particularly amusing. The film would be no worse for Elvis' absence.

[MattofSteel]

I sense an overwhelming trend of trademarking expressions starting. Might CBN soon be responsible for a shift in common internet lingo?

[blueman]

I think what Judo sees in Elvis is ultimately there, but I personally don't find it particularly amusing. The film would be no worse for Elvis' absence.

At first read, well sure. But then... he's the contrasting element in many scenes, I think what we take from characters/scenes happening around him might be lessened without him shading the context?

For me, he works.

[Judo chop]

The film would be no worse for Elvis' absence.

That is absolutely correct. As I’ve said a gazillion times, Elvis is not even part of the film. Honestly, the closest thing to Elvis elsewhere in the Bond canon is Lazenby’s “…other fella” line. They are both a wink through the fourth wall at the audience. The difference is that Elvis is stealthy about it, and that's all the difference in the world to me.

I repeat: Elvis is NOT a part of QOS: The Story. He’s a silly anti-homage, and if you don’t like the joke, that’s certainly fair enough. I would expect people who are sick of Bond homaging himself to be at least hesitant to salute Elvis because he is of the same breed. But at the same time, I think he deserves more respect than the other homages, because this one is done differently, even oppositely, for the first time ever. And the last time ever, I'll bet.

But Elvis has nothing to do with Schaeffer’s cinematography, so I’ll sign-off now.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

What I feel about QOS overall, is that they tried too hard to be considered 'originals', which doesn't necessarily translate into a better Bond movie, because the EON series is about doing the best you can to keep it appealing but still delivers something classic and in most of the cases epic, and I don't see that in this Forster's work; I know that they mentioned the Ken Adams's inspiration, among others old school sources, but I think that was never really evident in the result.

In conclusion, imo, the right thing to do for Bond is twist the formula (just like they did in CR), not mechanically repeate it like in the Brosnan era nor break it like in QOS.

P.S. I know that I'm going here a little bit off topic, however I think Schaefer's cinematography is an example of what I said about the whole movie.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 24 July 2009 - 08:32 PM.

[Harmsway]

I think what Judo sees in Elvis is ultimately there, but I personally don't find it particularly amusing. The film would be no worse for Elvis' absence.

At first read, well sure. But then... he's the contrasting element in many scenes, I think what we take from characters/scenes happening around him might be lessened without him shading the context?

I don't think he adds that much to his scenes as a "contrasting element" to make a difference.

[Dekard77]

Elvis just part of Greene's entourage. Usually it would have helped if he was shown doing something very useful rather than throwing 2 cubes of sugar to his coffee.
Also the only modern villain/henchman worth mentioning was Zao. He had a lot of presence on screen.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I repeat: Elvis is NOT a part of QOS: The Story.

Actually, he is; he exists as a plot device to give Bond more information about Greene -- albeit inadvertently.

[MattofSteel]

I guess the real mistake with Elvis was that the marketing people, early on in the process, instantly deemed this character as the "iconic henchman" part and pushed him as such during production, photo shoots, interviews, etc. when in reality, his impact on the film is probably comparable to Kratt in CR. Don't have any idea who that actor was, didn't ever see him do press.

But I still think Elvis made more of a "point."

[Dekard77]

Yeah he made a point of being a part of a discussion about Cinematography !

[MattofSteel]

Ha, for sure. Managed to worm his way in there somehow. Start talking about anything QOS related and it seems eventually the discussion eventually shifts to one of Elvis, the editing, or the gunbarrel.

[Dekard77]

Gunbarrel= Legendary
Elvis=Forgetful
QOS=Cinematography cool
Plot=Holes
Style=Remarkable
Daniel Craig=Stylish
Fields=Terrible Wig
Camille=Super

Edited by Dekard77, 26 July 2009 - 04:05 PM.

[Double-Oh Agent]

Ha, for sure. Managed to worm his way in there somehow. Start talking about anything QOS related and it seems eventually the discussion eventually shifts to one of Elvis, the editing, or the gunbarrel.

Not to mention the theme song, the main titles, the conclusion of the boat chase, the freefall, and Bond's treatment of Mathis' body.

[MattofSteel]

Indeed.

I can't really jump on the train to criticize Fields, however. Probably met with some of the same criticism as Elvis, but she was start to finish a brilliant character. Too bad she was woefully underused.

[DaveBond21]

I am not in the business of canonizing anything. Certainly not round here. But - on the example of ELVIS - why do we need to see the 22nd chief henchmen as a brooding, excessively proportioned, ruthless, agile killer?

I found Elvis to be remarkably similar the the bald, weak-looking henchman in Casino Royale.

http://screenmusings...ges/CR_0278.htm

and then there was Vlad in Die Another Day, another henchman who doesn't fit the ruthless, agile killer mode.

[MattofSteel]

Kratt looked kind of badass, to me. Again - just didn't have much to do besides some occasional knife play.

It has started to feel a bit redundant with the obligatory henchman role in every film rather than, say, saving up and then hitting us with a really GOOD one. TWINE was the last one I can think of that didn't have an easily identifiable henchman - Elektra and Renard were sort of co-villains.

Zao was a terrific concept, yet a wasted opportunity who was thrown terrible, terrible dialogue.

[DaveBond21]

Kratt looked kind of badass, to me. Again - just didn't have much to do besides some occasional knife play.

It has started to feel a bit redundant with the obligatory henchman role in every film rather than, say, saving up and then hitting us with a really GOOD one. TWINE was the last one I can think of that didn't have an easily identifiable henchman - Elektra and Renard were sort of co-villains.

Zao was a terrific concept, yet a wasted opportunity who was thrown terrible, terrible dialogue.

Gabor and Davidov were the henchmen in TWINE. Gabor was a large, well dressed black guy with dreadlocks, and the following film had a baddie with the same look, Mr Kil.

[blueman]

Guess I'm never sorry to see minor characters given just enough screen time... leaves for time for BOND.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary".

As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 27 July 2009 - 08:46 AM.

[Dekard77]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary".

As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish. I like the CR one but QOS gunbarrel shows up from nowhere and the dot fades and QOS title appear. Lovely. It was also the first time since TND that I loved the way the Arnold played the Bond theme.. Not that it would matter to most but I liked the fact DC was wearing a suit.

Edited by Dekard77, 27 July 2009 - 10:07 AM.

[double o ego]

As opposed to wearing a tux? Agreed.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary".

As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles) .

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 27 July 2009 - 01:53 PM.

[Dekard77]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary".

As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles) .

My preference is to QOS. I never liked the thick cgi effect blood on CR.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary".

As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles) .

My preference is to QOS. I never liked the thick cgi effect blood on CR.

When I said that the CR's gunbarrel was realistic I was only referring to the- very brief- sequence previous to the blood. You must have in mind, that the blood in this case,is also part of the beautiful and very elegant retro sixties style main titles, so it has to looked this way (cartoonish, if you want). Besides I don't see much of a difference between the aspect of the blood among this couple of Craig's sequences, I think the big defference it is in the presentation of the gunbarrel itself without the blood.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 27 July 2009 - 03:29 PM.

[Dekard77]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary".

As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles) .

My preference is to QOS. I never liked the thick cgi effect blood on CR.

When I said that CR's gunbarrel was realistic I was only referring to the- very brief sequence- previous to the blood. The blood is part of the beautiful and very elegant retro sixties style main titles, so it has to looked this way (cartoonish, if you want). Besides I don't see much of a difference between the aspect of the blood among this couple of Craig's sequences, I think the big defference it is in the presentation of the gunbarrel itself without the blood.

Bloody Hell ! You like CR, I like QOS.

[Dekard77]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary".

As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles) .

My preference is to QOS. I never liked the thick cgi effect blood on CR.

When I said that CR's gunbarrel was realistic I was only referring to the- very brief sequence- previous to the blood. The blood is part of the beautiful and very elegant retro sixties style main titles, so it has to looked this way (cartoonish, if you want). Besides I don't see much of a difference between the aspect of the blood among this couple of Craig's sequences, I think the big defference it is in the presentation of the gunbarrel itself without the blood.

Bloody Hell ! You like CR, I like QOS.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary". As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles).

My preference is to QOS. I never liked the thick cgi effect blood on CR.

When I said that CR's gunbarrel was realistic I was only referring to the- very brief sequence- previous to the blood. The blood is part of the beautiful and very elegant retro sixties style main titles, so it has to looked this way (cartoonish, if you want). Besides I don't see much of a difference between the aspect of the blood among this couple of Craig's sequences, I think the big defference it is in the presentation of the gunbarrel itself without the blood.

Bloody Hell ! You like CR, I like QOS.

Potaetoes, potahtoes, mate.

Anyhow, QOS's gunbarrel is, if you think about it, a bit like Dr. No's, as well; remember the little red gunbarrel over the credits? If you compare it like that, you'll see that CR and QOS are really one long story, so the twin gunbarrels serve as bookends for the entire thing.

[Dekard77]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary". As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles).

My preference is to QOS. I never liked the thick cgi effect blood on CR.

When I said that CR's gunbarrel was realistic I was only referring to the- very brief sequence- previous to the blood. The blood is part of the beautiful and very elegant retro sixties style main titles, so it has to looked this way (cartoonish, if you want). Besides I don't see much of a difference between the aspect of the blood among this couple of Craig's sequences, I think the big defference it is in the presentation of the gunbarrel itself without the blood.

Bloody Hell ! You like CR, I like QOS.

Potaetoes, potahtoes, mate.

Anyhow, QOS's gunbarrel is, if you think about it, a bit like Dr. No's, as well; remember the little red gunbarrel over the credits? If you compare it like that, you'll see that CR and QOS are really one long story, so the twin gunbarrels serve as bookends for the entire thing.

Ah yes yes... I was thinking of Dr No. I felt QOS is closer to that. I am game to see Bond in a different light every now and then and really hated the Moore 70's gunbarrel till the end of the of tenure.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Gunbarrel= Legendary

I know this is again something off topic, but... I still can't understand how QOS's gunbarrel could be called "legendary". As many other things in this movie,the gunbarrel is different for the EON series (just because it's out of the traditional order), but I don't see how this distinction could make it any better or legendary. In the other hand, I think CR's gunbarrel is the one that really could be considered legendary.

For one it was the effects used to make the gunbarrel. It seemed quite refined. The CR one looked CGI/Cartoonish.

For me it was the other way around. QOS's gunbarrel seems average, nothing that different from the Brosnan era, and just odd- only for the sake of it- due to its use after the finale; whereas CR's looked for the first time realistic in its shape, matching with its correspondent context. and still respecting the tradition of the gunbarrel before the main titles (in fact, it has the same order of DN, where the gunbarrel is directly followed for the titles).

My preference is to QOS. I never liked the thick cgi effect blood on CR.

When I said that CR's gunbarrel was realistic I was only referring to the- very brief sequence- previous to the blood. The blood is part of the beautiful and very elegant retro sixties style main titles, so it has to looked this way (cartoonish, if you want). Besides I don't see much of a difference between the aspect of the blood among this couple of Craig's sequences, I think the big defference it is in the presentation of the gunbarrel itself without the blood.

Bloody Hell ! You like CR, I like QOS.

Potaetoes, potahtoes, mate.

Anyhow, QOS's gunbarrel is, if you think about it, a bit like Dr. No's, as well; remember the little red gunbarrel over the credits? If you compare it like that, you'll see that CR and QOS are really one long story, so the twin gunbarrels serve as bookends for the entire thing.

Ah yes yes... I was thinking of Dr No. I felt QOS is closer to that. I am game to see Bond in a different light every now and then and really hated the Moore 70's gunbarrel till the end of the of tenure.

So... you're saying you really liked AVTAK's gunbarrel?