127 replies to this topic

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

Why would Craig be critical of a film which was both good and successful?

Anyone with even half a brain will tell you that CR was an outlier in 'critical circles' in a series that's hardly meant to be Merchant Ivory.

It's not as if QOS was as critically or commercially as dissapointing as Golden Gun or LTK or 'Tomorrow, is it?

Quantum was as successful as Craig's first film, something which neither Moore nor Dalton can say...and something Lazenby doesn't even have the luxury of having.

My sentiments as well.

Nobody expected CR to be what it was and it took most people by surprise. You would have to find QoS something of a letdown from that height. But not a major drop in quality.

There seems to be a little too much emphasis on action, but there's more than enough good and interesting stuff going on in that film that I find it a very successful follow-up to CR.

I think Criaig would be and should be very proud of his work in QOS.

Indeed.

He was a physical tour de force, his acting trumped all others and he delivered lines as if they were instant classics.

Craig makes Lazenby look like an cheap amateur who was completely out of his depth.

I wouldn't go that far. The final scene of OHMSS shows just what Lazenby could do. I think it's the biggest tragedy in Bond film history that Lazenby didn't do another one.

[Satorious]

I read in some interview in the UK that Craig was more proud of his work in QOS than CR, presumably because he got on well with Forster and because he got more say in the development. From memory this quote was before the film was finished. But it probably explains why he was upset by the critism the film seemed to get. To be fair, most people noted that he was the highlight of the movie, but Craig is a clever chap. He knows he can't afford to drop the ball on the next one or the series will be in trouble - the jury is still out on him after QOS. I believe there is a decent film in QOS somewhere, but this has been all but lost in the terrible choppy editing (which in turn probably wasn't helped by the short post-production schedule). Forster is part-responsible for setting the editing pace, I can only lament how many wonderful little moments might be sitting on the cutting room floor in order to maintain the frentic pace he wanted.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

I believe there is a decent film in QOS somewhere, but this has been all but lost in the terrible choppy editing (which in turn probably wasn't helped by the short post-production schedule). Forster is part-responsible for setting the editing pace, I can only lament how many wonderful little moments might be sitting on the cutting room floor in order to maintain the frentic pace he wanted.

I totally agree.

[HildebrandRarity]

I believe there is a decent film in QOS somewhere, but this has been all but lost in the terrible choppy editing (which in turn probably wasn't helped by the short post-production schedule). Forster is part-responsible for setting the editing pace, I can only lament how many wonderful little moments might be sitting on the cutting room floor in order to maintain the frentic pace he wanted.

I totally disagree.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

[HildebrandRarity]

[HildebrandRarity]

...choppy editing (which in turn probably wasn't helped by the short post-production schedule)...

Where are you coming up with BS like that?



It was a normal production and post-production schedule and followed the timeframes of countless other James Bond films after Thunderball (save The Man With The Golden Gun).

Do you have a link to substantiate your statement, friend?

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

[HildebrandRarity]

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

[Satorious]

...choppy editing (which in turn probably wasn't helped by the short post-production schedule)...

Where are you coming up with BS like that?



It was a normal production and post-production schedule and followed the timeframes of countless other James Bond films after Thunderball (save The Man With The Golden Gun).

Do you have a link to substantiate your statement, friend?

This may have been the case, but Forster stated this himself.

http://commanderbond...-of-solace.html

[HildebrandRarity]

...choppy editing (which in turn probably wasn't helped by the short post-production schedule)...

Where are you coming up with BS like that?



It was a normal production and post-production schedule and followed the timeframes of countless other James Bond films after Thunderball (save The Man With The Golden Gun).

Do you have a link to substantiate your statement, friend?

This may have been the case, but Forster stated this himself.

http://commanderbond...-of-solace.html

Yes I know what he said after the picture came out but your statement said it was a "short post-production schedule".

The fact is, it was a normal Eon production time-frame.



As an aside, did it ever occur to people that it actually takes more time to edit those numerous shots into one tight scene (or scenes) than to have a film that has no lightening fast/quick edits?

Anyone with half a brain can see that the number of cuts in Q0S were of a very high quantity...and Forster did an outstanding job with his crew in my opinion.

The period October, 2005 - November, 2008 was one of the most exciting in James Bond history...the most exciting since, say, late 1970s for me...and the shoot which started with the Palio di Siena in August, 2007 and ended with the release of Quantum 15 months later was a huge part of it.

[Satorious]

Think we'll agree to disagree.

This was all said "before" not after the film (hence why Forster was talking about in 1 week I will show it to the producers, and the date it was posted was August before the film).

Perhaps the production schedule was the same as always (I have no evidence either way - I'd love to know the post-production schedule for each movie if you know them?), but it clearly this wasn't enough time for Forster who was used to more than double the time on projects. Hence I'd argue it's fair to say that the post-production period was "too short" - even if that was just for Forster? And as he's the main one who is pulling the project together... The annoying thing in my opinion is that he's shot a wonderfully looking movie which is destroyed by the editing and not allowing any shots to breathe - hence destroying any ounce of tension or character nuance. I recall sitting in the cinema watching CR, tense in my seat. Three scenes in particular standout - the Hotel scene with Obanno, the torture scene and Mr White getting shot in the leg gave me a good old jolt. I just recall watching QOS and my brain was going numb. There was no tension or connection with it, it was just fast and noisy - non-stop.

Having done editing myself, there isn't a huge correlation between the fact that a film has 50 cuts in a scene, or 10. It will obviously have *some* impact (mostly on sound-mixing), but my experience is that if a scene works (and storyboarding can help massively), it can be cut together quickly. Especially if you have multiple angles/a well organised structure for each take - which I'm sure Bond has. It's the problem scenes which don't work for whatever reason that take up the majority of the editor's time. Occasionally having less time can actually be a tremendous benefit (eg. Spielberg's Munich).

[supernova]

I remember before Quantum of Solace came out that Daniel Craig was quoted as 'excitedly' reporting that there were lots of BIG action shots in the movie. Also remember the groans in the forums on this website in response to his comments.

Also recall that it appeared Daniel Craig was instrumental in the final decision re the name, Quantum of Solace. And was very excited about Marc Forster being the Director.

So if he is now exhibiting dislike of Quantum of Solace -- HE HAS ONLY HIMSELF TO BLAME.

[HildebrandRarity]

So if he is now exhibiting dislike of Quantum of Solace -

Link, please?

[HildebrandRarity]

No link, eh?

Typical.

[Zorin Industries]

For a fact, most of the work we did in Panama was gutted in the editing room. I almost feel I wasted my time during those weeks.

Sorry, but don't extras the world over say exactly that?

[HildebrandRarity]

For a fact, most of the work we did in Panama was gutted in the editing room. I almost feel I wasted my time during those weeks.

Sorry, but don't extras the world over say exactly that?

You're being generous, Zorin.

The fact is extras are bottom-of-the-Totem-Pole.

Do they even get a mention in the End Credits? You know, the tiney writing before fade to black?

[Zorin Industries]

For a fact, most of the work we did in Panama was gutted in the editing room. I almost feel I wasted my time during those weeks.

Sorry, but don't extras the world over say exactly that?

You're being generous, Zorin.

The fact is extras are bottom-of-the-Totem-Pole.

Do they even get a mention in the End Credits? You know, the tiney writing before fade to black?

It's not fair to label them bottom of anything. And they are "supporting actors" darling not "extras". I remember a year or so back being stuck on a catering bus with loads of extras and the conversations were priceless.

"Press the lift button onscreen for the lead actor? Well only if I get lunch first....THE BILL wouldn't think twice about giving you lunch first".

[HildebrandRarity]

Yes, darling...but do they get a 'credit' in the End Titles?

[Zorin Industries]

Yes, darling...but do they get a 'credit' in the End Titles?

Yes, but they are cut to make the film run shorter.

[HildebrandRarity]

Yes, darling...but do they get a 'credit' in the End Titles?

Yes, but they are cut to make the film run shorter.

Yes, but in the case of Quantum they could have lengthened the film's run time from 104 mins to, say, 108 minutes to satisfy all the anal FanBois™/FanBoyz™ needs for a longer James Bond Moooovie run time!

[DR76]

My sentiments as well.

Nobody expected CR to be what it was and it took most people by surprise. You would have to find QoS something of a letdown from that height. But not a major drop in quality.

There seems to be a little too much emphasis on action, but there's more than enough good and interesting stuff going on in that film that I find it a very successful follow-up to CR.

Thank you. I may not have found QoS as good as CR, but I didn't expect it to be. I have never come across a time when a really excellent Bond film was followed by one that was equally good or better.

[marktmurphy]

I'd be surprised if anyone involved was totally satisfied with it.

[bondrules]

I'd be surprised if anyone involved was totally satisfied with it.

I can only think of David Arnold being satisfied.

[Zorin Industries]

I'd be surprised if anyone involved was totally satisfied with it.

That is only opinion. And there are very few films where those responsible for making it are wholly satisfied with the end product.

[The Shark]

I'd be surprised if anyone involved was totally satisfied with it.

I can only think of David Arnold being satisfied.

Why?

[bondrules]

I'd be surprised if anyone involved was totally satisfied with it.

I can only think of David Arnold being satisfied.

Why?

The soundtrack was pretty good.

[The Shark]

I'd be surprised if anyone involved was totally satisfied with it.

I can only think of David Arnold being satisfied.

Why?

The soundtrack was pretty good.

It was much better than his other stuff, but still pretty average.

[bondrules]

I'd be surprised if anyone involved was totally satisfied with it.

I can only think of David Arnold being satisfied.

Why?

The soundtrack was pretty good.

It was much better than his other stuff, but still pretty average.

Unfortunately, it was the best thing about QoS.