166 replies to this topic

[Safari Suit]

He's not much of a one for the ol' personal opinions it seems.

I suppose love for QOS will be like love for Moonraker, eventually; you get ridiculed for it, at first, but as you grow older and more sentimental, you find others around you beginning to mellow, coming around to the side of the film.... and, at long last, they finally see what was missed.

I'm not someone whose missing out if that's what you think, because I love it.

[Blonde Bond]

I saw it on 7th of November at 0:07 AM. It made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

I still get that warm and fuzzy feeling whenever I watch the movie.

[Genuine Felix Leiter]

Oh God, I hope I don't get murdered for this, but I enjoyed the movie. Sure, it's not as good as Casino Royale, but it's hugely enjoyable, Craig is fantastic, as is Judi Dench, I just love them two on screen together, they have a real spark, especially whey she's furious with him. the car chase that opens the movie is brilliant beyond words and Almaric makes for a great Tony Blair...sorry Bond villian. There are issues with it, I mean the editing during the action sequences at time makes the film almost practically unwatchable, especially in the foot chase after the credits, the theme song by Jack White and Alicia Keys, while far from being the worst, is also far from being the best as well, but the climax at the end is superbly staged and I really hope they bring Olga Kurylenko back, and bringing a more serialised sense of continuity to the series is also a good thing, but I do agree with some of the critical consensus that there is maybe too much of a Bourne style vibe to the movie that Eon should leave alone, but its hard to be too critical when the film itself is, in my mind, actually an excellent one. Oh, and kudos to Eon for not bloating the movie's running time. In a day and age when Batman movies are lasting for nearly three hours, it's great to see a tight 1 hour and 45 minute Bond picture.

[volante]

Quantum of Solace. Absolutley brilliant film.
Great action, great humour.

All the elements of a Bond classic. Come guys you have to move with the times.

[zencat]

Humor???

[Tarl_Cabot]

It makes me laugh...at the Brosnan era.

[elizabeth]

it wasn't as good as TMWTGG (my favorite), but i absolutely LOVED the action scenes, especially when bond and mitchell fall through the glass as they're fighting.

[Skudor]

I do love the way Quantum of Solace splits the crowd. I still love it, partially because it is so original and different from the Bonds (whereas Casino Royale was effectively a very good but standard^TM Bond film).

Having said that I get a bit miffed when people diss the editing like it's sub-standard. I see it as deliberate and pretty damn good really. But I do get that it's not to everyone's taste.

[The Shark]

I do love the way Quantum of Solace splits the crowd. I still love it, partially because it is so original and different from the Bonds (whereas Casino Royale was effectively a very good but standard^TM Bond film).

Having said that I get a bit miffed when people diss the editing like it's sub-standard. I see it as deliberate and pretty damn good really. But I do get that it's not to everyone's taste.

The problem with the editing, is not with the speed (though with some of the action sequences that does become a problem), it's how overly metronomic the cuts are. In other words lazy editing. Where the cuts are almost far too regular (i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 etc...) to the extent where the scenes appear to be following the rigid excessively fast editing, where it should be the cuts following the natural ebb and flow of the scene, something CR's veteran editor Stuart Baird understood fully well. A lot of this is particularly noticeable in the poker game, where the edits seem fluid and entirely natural - some shots taking up more time others less; almost wave-like in their frequency. All designed to follow, yet at the same time create a mood and tone for the scene.

Another important fact, is that the Baird edited his cuts with the aid of a large screen and projector, where in comparison the editing from QOS looks like it was done almost unanimously on a small screen, which unfortunately doesn't work for Bond.

Edited by The Shark, 15 December 2009 - 11:06 PM.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

So guys, when was the first time you saw Quantum of Solace, and how did you feel?

I went to the movie after Thanksgiving break. I was so excited to see this movie. The trailer looked great and Daniel Craig was back!
When I actually sat down and watched the full movie, however, it just was so boring and the editing was so bad that I almost wanted to stop watching.

[Cabainus]

Quantum of Solace. Absolutley brilliant film.
Great action, great humour.

All the elements of a Bond classic. Come guys you have to move with the times.

I must have missed the great humour.. Was it the bit where Elvis' wig falls off?

[Eddie Burns]

Saw it the first time...thought it was ok, spent most of my time afterwards defending it to my friends who'd seen it with me.

Watched it the second time...absolutely hated it. So, one year on, I still do. The action scenes are fairly dull, filled with characters that we have no interest in. Greene really had no point. Camille had no point. Mathis had no point. The character that mattered...Mr. White....well, he had no point either. None of these characters enhance the movie at all. They are just padding for a really paper thin plot.

This was just Forster experimenting on a genre he had no clue about. As it is still fresh, I don't think it will be remembered fondly at all further down the line. Why? It lacks personality, imagination and has absolutely nothing pleasantly memorable to raise when discussing movies with friends.

Fleming's Bond? Funny, I've always thought Fleming had imagination.

A shallow sequel. B23 will show it up.

[Louis Armstrong]

I loved Quantum when I first saw it in theatres. (But then again, I didn't hate Spider-Man 3 the first time I saw that particular piece of hoo-ha, either.) Like with my first viewing of Casino Royale, I left the theatre feeling plucky and satisfied. The editing was bothersome, but it just took a few DVD viewings to understand it.

Today, what do I think of it...My feelings are extremely mixed. Easily my least favourite part of the film: M. She has at least eight scenes. A condescending and unprofessional 'boss' who insists on following and assisting Bond in the field. ("So, M...you wanna go to Russia with me? ok cool, thanx") Don't like any of her scenes really, especially when she's accompanied by a futuristic office and that uncharismatic limp noodle of a secretary. Her screentime could've been cut down if she'd only suspected Bond of one or two unnecessary killings, instead of three. Would've made for more hard-hitting drama in that department, too. But I suppose the film re-uses this device so often because the story is so short.

Besides the opening (a car chase that's brutal and stylish without descending into gaudy stunts) and ending (the engagingly shot and staged exploding hotel climax - great colours and some nice moments of humanity like Bond considering suicide & Medrano's angry rape), I find the action altogether too common. Everybody and their dog has done a rooftop skedaddle and the airplane dogfight is outright dull. Considering Quantum wants to be an action film first and foremost, the action could've been shot and scored much more interestingly. I don't mind the lack of cute stunts or 'Bond moves' (if you'd like). But this kind of action, with its focus on brutality, should serve the story (yes I'm addressing you, pointless boat chase) and come as a sort of climax after character and plot development. Which Quantum severely lacks.

Now, if we focus on the characters. I think the film's downfall is round about the halfway point, when Fields is sent in. She is a comic character with little development, unbelievable in her role for numerous reasons, and when she's killed off, the film tries to play it for drama. Yuck. I suppose I might like her better if I found the actress attractive, but I don't.
Also, didn't really appreciate how the only thing Mathis had to say on his deathbed was about Vesper, of all people. Convoluted. I don't know why they had to kill him either, or make us think he was a traitor in CR. Why does every friend of Bond's need to die or turn out a traitor? Oh yeah, to shock the audience. Yawn.

But what do I like about Quantum? The aesthetics of the film hit me right away when I first saw it, and they still do it for me. Its emphasis on blacks and whites is appealing and in my book, it features the only Arnold score ever capable of raising a scene beyond what it already was (a trick John Barry pulled in many Bonds of yesteryear). 'Inside Man' and the variations on it are great. Unfortunately, he still brings endless percussive loops and crescendos to action scenes that I sincerely believe drags them down. It's as if the producers are scared to leave one unscored these days. There is something to be said about letting sound effects and editing maintain excitement. With Arnold around, there is no ebb and flow of tension.

Camille has a positive character arc, which is welcome. I enjoy every scene between her and Bond because of their similar goals. Daniel Craig is ruthlessly efficient with low-key quips like 'Is that compliment?' and when displaying the haggard edges of Bond's state of mind. All in all, not a bad film, but I certainly enjoy parts of it more than others.
For a while, QoS got worse each time I revisited it. But this stopped at a point. For what it's worth, my opinion of it never goes into freefall like whenever I try revisiting Brosnan's 3rd and 4th outings. I'm very much looking forward to the next Bond flick (so long as Bond's character development sticks).

[JimmyBond]

Saw it the first time...thought it was ok, spent most of my time afterwards defending it to my friends who'd seen it with me.

Watched it the second time...absolutely hated it. So, one year on, I still do. The action scenes are fairly dull, filled with characters that we have no interest in. Greene really had no point. Camille had no point. Mathis had no point. The character that mattered...Mr. White....well, he had no point either. None of these characters enhance the movie at all. They are just padding for a really paper thin plot.

This was just Forster experimenting on a genre he had no clue about. As it is still fresh, I don't think it will be remembered fondly at all further down the line. Why? It lacks personality, imagination and has absolutely nothing pleasantly memorable to raise when discussing movies with friends.

Fleming's Bond? Funny, I've always thought Fleming had imagination.

A shallow sequel. B23 will show it up.

Hey you're back...and repeating the same old drivel that you were spouting before you left. Should have stayed away.

[The Shark]

Saw it the first time...thought it was ok, spent most of my time afterwards defending it to my friends who'd seen it with me.

Watched it the second time...absolutely hated it. So, one year on, I still do. The action scenes are fairly dull, filled with characters that we have no interest in. Greene really had no point. Camille had no point. Mathis had no point. The character that mattered...Mr. White....well, he had no point either. None of these characters enhance the movie at all. They are just padding for a really paper thin plot.

This was just Forster experimenting on a genre he had no clue about. As it is still fresh, I don't think it will be remembered fondly at all further down the line. Why? It lacks personality, imagination and has absolutely nothing pleasantly memorable to raise when discussing movies with friends.

Fleming's Bond? Funny, I've always thought Fleming had imagination.

A shallow sequel. B23 will show it up.

Hey you're back...and repeating the same old drivel that you were spouting before you left. Should have stayed away.

How petty and childish of you. Do you have to call alternative views "drivel" and tell anti-QOS members to go away?

Pathetic.

[JimmyBond]

I havent told you to go away have I? It has nothing to do with his views.

[Cabainus]

Saw it the first time...thought it was ok, spent most of my time afterwards defending it to my friends who'd seen it with me.

Watched it the second time...absolutely hated it. So, one year on, I still do. The action scenes are fairly dull, filled with characters that we have no interest in. Greene really had no point. Camille had no point. Mathis had no point. The character that mattered...Mr. White....well, he had no point either. None of these characters enhance the movie at all. They are just padding for a really paper thin plot.

This was just Forster experimenting on a genre he had no clue about. As it is still fresh, I don't think it will be remembered fondly at all further down the line. Why? It lacks personality, imagination and has absolutely nothing pleasantly memorable to raise when discussing movies with friends.

Fleming's Bond? Funny, I've always thought Fleming had imagination.

A shallow sequel. B23 will show it up.

Hey you're back...and repeating the same old drivel that you were spouting before you left. Should have stayed away.

Think thats a little unfair. The guy just gave an opinion..

[O.H.M.S.S.]

I remember it very well, I went with three friends, it was fun and exciting. The film was great and I enjoyed it very much, but when the film ended, the two of us who are the biggest Bond fans agreed that the movie was great and that the PTS, Palio and Tosca scenes were brilliant. The other two however, didn't like it. One of them said that Bond looked like a Russian gangster in QOS and the other furiously got out of his chair and said: "Worst Bond ever." Opinions differ, don't they?

[Bucky]

I do love the way Quantum of Solace splits the crowd. I still love it, partially because it is so original and different from the Bonds (whereas Casino Royale was effectively a very good but standard^TM Bond film).

Having said that I get a bit miffed when people diss the editing like it's sub-standard. I see it as deliberate and pretty damn good really. But I do get that it's not to everyone's taste.

pretty much sums up my view. i sometimes wonder if that is part of the reason why i rank the film higher than casino royale but i just love watching it so much.

[JimmyBond]

Then I'm going to hell

[jamie00007]

I enjoyed it a lot when it was first released, and it has grown on me a lot since then. I like it more and more every time I see it, and it finishes leaving me wanting more (the mark of a great Bond film). Its been my most rewatched Bond movie this year. In fact I feel like watching it right now.

Having said that I get a bit miffed when people diss the editing like it's sub-standard. I see it as deliberate and pretty damn good really. But I do get that it's not to everyone's taste.

Yes, I completely agree. I get so tired of people ranting about the "bad editing" like it was some kind of amateur mess up. The editing was very deliberately done for a purpose, and those who did it did so very skillfully. I completely understand that it doesnt work for some people, and I dont think it should be used again for that reason. But it worked beautifully for me, it made the action exciting and dynamic and sucked me in. I understand that some people had the opposite reaction. But that doesnt make it "bad". Just a particular style that doesnt work for you.

[The Shark]

Yes, sorry you're quite right. The editing was "deliberately" bad.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Yes, sorry you're quite right. The editing was "deliberately" bad.

Respect peoples' opinions, why don't you? Some people like it; don't belittle them for it.

[The Shark]

Yes, sorry you're quite right. The editing was "deliberately" bad.

Respect peoples' opinions, why don't you? Some people like it; don't belittle them for it.

I'm not belittling anyone or their opinions. I'm belittling the film.

[DamnCoffee]

Yes, sorry you're quite right. The editing was "deliberately" bad.

Respect peoples' opinions, why don't you? Some people like it; don't belittle them for it.

Hypocrite.

I see you doing that exact same thing sometimes, Mr Blofeld.

Just one example...

Generic rock for a generic film.

...from a generic poster with a generic name.

[volante]

Guys, if you want to see bad editing go back to FRWL on the train with Red Grant, and TB during the final fight on the boat.

The editing is done to trick the eye into beliving what is happening, watch it again.

Watch it in slowmotion, Craig's actions are teriffic.

[The Shark]

Guys, if you want to see bad editing go back to FRWL on the train with Red Grant, and TB during the final fight on the boat.

I hope you're joking. Those sequences are some of the best edited in the whole franchise, thanks to Hunt's masterful editing.

[DamnCoffee]

The Thunderball sequence is pretty badly edited, you have to admit. It doesn't destroy the enjoyment of the film, though.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

Guys, if you want to see bad editing go back to FRWL on the train with Red Grant, and TB during the final fight on the boat.

I hope you're joking. Those sequences are some of the best edited in the whole franchise, thanks to Hunt's masterful editing.

I agree, those sequences are well edited. Hunt was prepared to break rules with his cuts, and films are all the better for it. If the early Bonds had less innovative editing, its doubtful they would have been so successful, not least they would be very slow to watch today.

[The Shark]

The Thunderball sequence is pretty badly edited, you have to admit. It doesn't destroy the enjoyment of the film, though.

It's not that editing that's bad, it's the sped-up back projection. The editing along with the music in tandem, help speed the climax up to a breakneck pace.

I agree, those sequences are well edited. Hunt was prepared to break rules with his cuts, and films are all the better for it. If the early Bonds had less innovative editing, its doubtful they would have been so successful, not least they would be very slow to watch today.

Agreed. If the Bond films technically brought anything new or innovative to the world of film in the 60s, it was the revolutionary editing. Even Terence Young agreed with that.