81 replies to this topic

[Mr. Blofeld]

So, you're slowly getting to liking the movie, Richmond Spy?

Hey, it's not healthy to loathe things for an extended amount of time! We probably have no less than two years from now until the next Bond film...sure, I know that is nothing compared to what we've dealt with in the past, but life is ticking!

Specifically, your life? You're a married man; that's great, just pick up a typewriter, and we'll have a new Bond adventure in no time...

[Loomis]

But why QOS should be judged solely against its predecessor film is not something I understand.

Because, strictly speaking, QUANTUM OF SOLACE is *not* BOND 22, nor does it feel like such. It's CASINO ROYALE II.

If only that were true. QUANTUM OF SOLACE takes place in a totally different stylistic universe to that of CASINO ROYALE (thanks largely, I believe, to Forster's egotistical stamping of his own visual preferences and worthless "personal vision" all over the project), so it doesn't even succeed at being so much as a flawed (never mind a decent) followup or coda to CASINO ROYALE. In no meaningful sense does it have anything to do with CASINO ROYALE whatsoever.

For what it's worth, I consider QUANTUM OF SOLACE to be BOND 22. I've never bought the idea that the Craig era constitutes an all-new series (and, yes, I know it's an origin story era), and I don't believe Eon does, either.

[Harmsway]

If only that were true. QUANTUM OF SOLACE takes place in a totally different stylistic universe to that of CASINO ROYALE (thanks largely, I believe, to Forster's egotistical stamping of his own visual preferences and worthless "personal vision" all over the project), so it doesn't even succeed at being so much as a flawed (never mind a decent) followup or coda to CASINO ROYALE. In no meaningful sense does it have anything to do with CASINO ROYALE whatsoever.

I didn't say it was a good CASINO ROYALE II (after all, I've already argued that it fails to continue what CASINO ROYALE established in any worthwhile fashion).

But it certainly doesn't feel right lumping it alongside THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS or OCTOPUSSY or whatever, and that's because there's nothing independent about it. Even if it fails miserably at being a continuation, it's very tied to CASINO ROYALE. And that's one of the biggest problems with QUANTUM OF SOLACE. It's neither satisfying as a follow-up or something in-and-of-itself.

I've never bought the idea that the Craig era constitutes an all-new series (and, yes, I know it's an origin story era), and I don't believe Eon does, either.

I'm not saying that it constitutes a new series. But every entry in the franchise prior to QUANTUM OF SOLACE was, by and large, independent. QUANTUM OF SOLACE, however, is not.

[Mr. Blofeld]

But why QOS should be judged solely against its predecessor film is not something I understand.

Because, strictly speaking, QUANTUM OF SOLACE is *not* BOND 22, nor does it feel like such. It's CASINO ROYALE II.

If only that were true. QUANTUM OF SOLACE takes place in a totally different stylistic universe to that of CASINO ROYALE (thanks largely, I believe, to Forster's egotistical stamping of his own visual preferences and worthless "personal vision" all over the project), so it doesn't even succeed at being so much as a flawed (never mind a decent) followup or coda to CASINO ROYALE. In no meaningful sense does it have anything to do with CASINO ROYALE whatsoever.

For what it's worth, I consider QUANTUM OF SOLACE to be BOND 22. I've never bought the idea that the Craig era constitutes an all-new series (and, yes, I know it's an origin story era), and I don't believe Eon does, either.

Do you really hate Marc Forster that much?

[Loomis]

I don't hate him at all. What a bizarre thing to say. I quite like THE KITE RUNNER.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I don't hate him at all. What a bizarre thing to say. I quite like THE KITE RUNNER.

Says the same guy who said this?

QUANTUM OF SOLACE takes place in a totally different stylistic universe to that of CASINO ROYALE (thanks largely, I believe, to Forster's egotistical stamping of his own visual preferences and worthless "personal vision" all over the project)

Night and day, mate.

[The Shark]

I don't hate him at all. What a bizarre thing to say. I quite like THE KITE RUNNER.

Says the same guy who said this?

QUANTUM OF SOLACE takes place in a totally different stylistic universe to that of CASINO ROYALE (thanks largely, I believe, to Forster's egotistical stamping of his own visual preferences and worthless "personal vision" all over the project)

Night and day, mate.

Hate's a strong word wouldn't you say?

He merely disliked his approach to the film, his general apathy to the Bond series, more interested in selfishly writing out his "personal take" in italic marker pen while misunderstanding the character and everything he represents while receiving a handsome paycheck.

I still think he's an interesting director, even if he comes off as a bit stuck up and pretentious.

Edited by The Shark, 02 September 2009 - 03:32 AM.

[The spy who loved me]

Did you feel, that Fields death could've been handled a lot better? The emotional side of things? I for one, thought some of the scene was wasted. The scene itself focus' more on Bond and M, rather than the poor dead woman on the bed.

(...) I think it would've been a lot better if the scene had a lot more emotional impact.

For instance, what would you say if this happened instead...

BOND and CAMILLE enter the hotel, the HOTEL MANAGER walks over to them.

HOTEL MANAGER: Excuse me Sir, your wife left a message, the english woman, she left it for you this morning.
BOND: Thank you.

BOND takes the note, and opens it. It tells him to RUN

CAMILLE: What is it?
BOND: Would you mind waiting down here?
CAMILLE: I’ll be outside.

BOND walks up the stairs and along the landing, untill he comes to his hotel room. He slowly opens the door. Nothing. He walks into his room, slowly and suspiciously. His room is too quiet.

BOND: Fields?

BOND continues walking, His head turns sharply, and he walks towards the bedroom door. Once there, he takes a deep breath and opens it.

The site before him is shocking. FIELDS is on the bed, covered completely in oil. The room itself is quite tranquil. A light breeze is blowing the curtains slightly. The room doesn’t appear to be in that much of a mess. Only a few magazines and a broken lamp on the floor.

BOND runs to her aid.

BOND: NO. Fields? FIELDS!?

He checks her pulse – Nothing. He runs his hand over her face, gently, and rises up from the side of the bed. His breathing increases in anger. BOND leans out of the window, to get some air. He sees many black vehicles pull up outside, people get out of them and head in the hotel. He turns to leave, takes one last look at FIELDS, then walks out of the bedroom.

Just then, we see many armed guards enter the room, M leading them in. The Guards look around the hotel room.

BOND looks up at her. Angrily.

BOND: Oh, I’m dissapointed.
M: You Are?
BOND: How much oil did the Americans promise you?
M: This isn’t about oil.
BOND: Well that’s good because there isn’t any!
M: It’s about trust, you said you weren’t motivated by revenge.
BOND: I’m motivated by my duty..
M: No, I think you’re so blinded by inconsolable rage that you don’t care who you hurt. When you can’t tell your friends from your enemies it’s time to go.

BOND looks incredlby angry. TANNER walks up to M.

TANNER: Ma’am....
M: What is it?

TANNER signals M to the bedroom, M walks in and see’s FIELDS’ body.

BOND follows her in.

M: You might like to tell her your theory about there being no Oil... HER LUNGS ARE FULL OF IT.
BOND: It was Greene...
M: No doubt... but why?
BOND: It’s just misdirections...
M: I MEAN WHY HER BOND!? She was just supposed to send you home. She worked in an office, collecting reports. Look how well you charm works, James. They'll do anything for you won't they? How many is that now?

BOND looks like he’s about to explode with anger.

M: You’re removed from duty and suspended, pending further investigation. You’ll give what ever weapons you have to these men and leave with them now.

A GUARD puts his hand on BOND’s shoulder. BOND pulls out his GUN and throws it across the room. He gives M a very angry look and is escorted out of the room.

I'm agree with that. More pain, more emotion would have been better.

[Loomis]

I don't hate him at all. What a bizarre thing to say. I quite like THE KITE RUNNER.

Says the same guy who said this?

QUANTUM OF SOLACE takes place in a totally different stylistic universe to that of CASINO ROYALE (thanks largely, I believe, to Forster's egotistical stamping of his own visual preferences and worthless "personal vision" all over the project)

Night and day, mate.

Hate's a strong word wouldn't you say?

He merely disliked his approach to the film, his general apathy to the Bond series, more interested in selfishly writing out his "personal take" in italic marker pen while misunderstanding the character and everything he represents while receiving a handsome paycheck.

Exactly.

I'll point out that I don't hate QUANTUM OF SOLACE, either. I certainly have my gripes with it, but I don't loathe it in the way I loathe INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL or TERMINATOR SALVATION. Now those are films that really take their franchises to hell in a handcart. I find them unwatchable. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is merely a somewhat disappointing Bond film, but it also has its moments.

[Zorin Industries]

There is nowt wrong with FIELDS or her death. She is meant to be a throwaway bit of fluff that BOND learns a lesson from. I personally do not need to see every scene from every Bond film recreated in a new one just to please folk who apparently need their films to take them by the hand from A via B to C. It is base, basic and utterly redundant to intelligent filmmaking.

[The spy who loved me]

I personally do not need to see every scene from every Bond film recreated in a new one just to please folk who apparently need their films to take them by the hand from A via B to C. It is base, basic and utterly redundant to intelligent filmmaking.

Well...you've probably right.

[Judo chop]

I personally do not need to see every scene from every Bond film recreated in a new one just to please folk who apparently need their films to take them by the hand from A via B to C.

Well...you've probably right.

Unfortunately he makes his case about not needing scenes recreated on the topic of Agent Fields, who is purposely exactly that: a recreation.

[00Twelve]

He merely disliked his approach to the film, his general apathy to the Bond series, more interested in selfishly writing out his "personal take" in italic marker pen while misunderstanding the character and everything he represents while receiving a handsome paycheck.

I'm gonna get nitpicky and disagree with the sentiment that Forster "misunderstood" the character. No, Bond never had a "Vesper closure" story on paper, but it's a nice development and one that takes nothing away from the Bond mythos IMO. As to the tone in which he's presented, it's dead on literary. All just how I see it, of course.

[DominicGreene]

Well it's not like they loved each other, she was just a he didn't care about!

[The spy who loved me]

Well it's not like they loved each other, she was just a he didn't care about!

He seems more concerned by the murder of Solange ...

Edited by The spy who loved me, 03 September 2009 - 06:17 AM.

[Judo chop]

Well it's not like they loved each other, she was just a he didn't care about!

He seems more concerned by the murder of Solange ...

Wrong.

That’s all I have to say. Bond’s dialogue and Craig’s performances in the respective scenes will do the rest of the speaking for me.

[byline]

Well it's not like they loved each other, she was just a he didn't care about!

He seems more concerned by the murder of Solange ...

Wrong.

That’s all I have to say. Bond’s dialogue and Craig’s performances in the respective scenes will do the rest of the speaking for me.

Yup. I'm amazed that anyone would look at Bond's respective reactions in the two films and come to the conclusion that he cared more about Solange's death than Fields'. If anything, I'd give the edge to Fields, not Solange.

[Judo chop]

I'm amazed that anyone would look at Bond's respective reactions in the two films and come to the conclusion that he cared more about Solange's death than Fields'. If anything, I'd give the edge to Fields, not Solange.

Perhaps I'm nitpicking at your post, but Fields wins by well more than an 'edge', byline. It's a clear victory for Fields.

CR teaches us that Bond sees Solange as an unfortunate, but necessary casualty. QOS teaches Bond, a Bond that has now experienced true love, that there is a big difference between seducing a girl to her death for information and seducing a girl to her death simply because he can.

Whether or not you (not YOU personally) think those lessons are well spoken by their respective films is neither here nor there. The intentions in each film are clear.

At Solange’s death we have:

M (paraphrased): “This doesn’t really bother you, does it?”
Bond, with an emotionless expression: “No”.

You can’t get any clearer than that. You just CAN’T. It could be argued that Bond, in fact, really does care, and is simply suppressing his emotions for the sake of keeping a clear mind set on duty. I tend to agree, in fact. But that’s our own personal speculation. Even when pressed on the subject of whether killing Obano bothers him, Bond responds to Vesper “I wouldn’t be very good at my job if it did”, circumventing a direct answer, leaving it again to our speculation. But what’s up there on screen at the scene of Solange’s dead body, is pure ice.

The scene at Fields’ dead body, however, has another vibe entirely. Bond is visibly angered/troubled by the injustice that lies before him and, almost desperately, tries to find some sense in it before M cuts him off.

[The spy who loved me]

CR teaches us that Bond sees Solange as an unfortunate, but necessary casualty. QOS teaches Bond, a Bond that has now experienced true love, that there is a big difference between seducing a girl to her death for information and seducing a girl to her death simply because he can.

At Solange’s death we have:

M (paraphrased): “This doesn’t really bother you, does it?”
Bond, with an emotionless expression: “No”.

You can’t get any clearer than that. You just CAN’T. It could be argued that Bond, in fact, really does care, and is simply suppressing his emotions for the sake of keeping a clear mind set on duty. I tend to agree, in fact. But that’s our own personal speculation. Even when pressed on the subject of whether killing Obano bothers him, Bond responds to Vesper “I wouldn’t be very good at my job if it did”, circumventing a direct answer, leaving it again to our speculation. But what’s up there on screen at the scene of Solange’s dead body, is pure ice.

The scene at Fields’ dead body, however, has another vibe entirely. Bond is visibly angered/troubled by the injustice that lies before him and, almost desperately, tries to find some sense in it before M cuts him off.

Indeed. You're a very good observer.
Very interesting point of view about OO7's psychology...

[volante]

Bond feels anger at Fields' death scene, because someone has got one over on him.
M is not listening to him, thngs are not going his way.
Then he gets angry.

Bond knows there was no need for the girl to die, thereofre someone has to pay, Bond wants revenge, but for the whole problem. Not just the girl

[byline]

I'm amazed that anyone would look at Bond's respective reactions in the two films and come to the conclusion that he cared more about Solange's death than Fields'. If anything, I'd give the edge to Fields, not Solange.

Perhaps I'm nitpicking at your post, but Fields wins by well more than an 'edge', byline. It's a clear victory for Fields.

I agree, which is why I challenged The spy who loved me's post. I was actually agreeing with you. Maybe instead of "edge" I should've said "victory" . . . though it's a pretty hollow one since, like Solange, Fields ended up dead. I do believe that Bond is bothered by Solange's death, but in a much more vague way than with Fields. He's still heady enough at that point that he's not quite adjusted to the notion of innocents dying for nothing, and at least indirectly because of him. But by the time Fields is killed, he's covered this terrain too many times already, and he's weary of it, so he's more troubled now than he was then.

At Solange’s death we have:

M (paraphrased): “This doesn’t really bother you, does it?”
Bond, with an emotionless expression: “No”.

You can’t get any clearer than that. You just CAN’T. It could be argued that Bond, in fact, really does care, and is simply suppressing his emotions for the sake of keeping a clear mind set on duty. I tend to agree, in fact. But that’s our own personal speculation. Even when pressed on the subject of whether killing Obano bothers him, Bond responds to Vesper “I wouldn’t be very good at my job if it did”, circumventing a direct answer, leaving it again to our speculation. But what’s up there on screen at the scene of Solange’s dead body, is pure ice.

True, and on the whole I agree with you. However, playing the devil's advocate, I do think it's important to note that we, the audience, catch Bond in several lies within this exchange. M asks Bond if Solange knew Bond's name or what he was looking for. Bond lies and says, "No." So I do think it's possible that, given the fact that we know Bond is giving M the answers she wants, not necessarily the truth, it's also possible Solange's death bothers him more than he's willing to let on to M. He sees that that's what M expects of him and behaves accordingly, since it seems to be moving him in more or less the right direction with her.

Edited by byline, 09 September 2009 - 11:40 PM.

[The spy who loved me]

M asks Bond if Solange knew Bond's name or what he was looking for. Bond lies and says, "No." So I do think it's possible that, given the fact that we know Bond is giving M the answers she wants, not necessarily the truth, it's also possible Solange's death bothers him more than he's willing to let on to M. He sees that that's what M expects of him and behaves accordingly, since it seems to be moving him in more or less the right direction with her.

That's exactly what I think.