71 replies to this topic

[Safari Suit]

I don't think people wait in a cinema que for a film thinking "oh boy, I can't wait for what will be the first of my five viewings!" I could be wrong but I've certainly never got the impression people generally watch a film for the first time from the persepctive of someone who plans on watching it multiple times even if they don't particularly like it

[byline]

FWIW, films were shot in a particular way because often they were viewed only once or twice by the typical film-goer. We do live in a different age where repeat viewings are not only readily accessible (via DVD, etc.), but actually expected by the general public. And I think that has had an impact on how films, TV shows, etc., are written, filmed and edited.

I'll buy that up to a point. However there ought to be a way to make it work the first time AND give you more on repeat viewings.

I agree. I think "Casino Royale" achieved this admirably, "Quantum of Solace" less so. But I think the thing that "Quantum of Solace" did quite deliberately, as a stylistic choice, was to put the audience right in the moment with Bond. We think things are confusing? So would he, in those situations, and he's reacting based on instinct and training. It's only afterward that he would be able to sort it all out mentally, and that's what we in the audience do, too.

As a stylistic choice, I think this worked well in some scenes, not so well in others. But as this thread demonstrates, the perception of how well this scene works differs markedly from one person to the next, so whether something "works" or not is highly subjective and a matter of personal perception/opinion.

[David_M]

Bond would have found the car chase frantic and confusing, yes, but at least he could look out the windshield and see which way he was going. It would've helped if we'd been given the equivalent; a few more long shots of the cars and their positions relative to each other. The frustrating thing for me is that I really think the needed film is in the can already; they just left it out.

I agree it's a deliberate decision and not outright incompetence. It's obviously an attempt to be Paul Greengrass, but IMHO not everyone is up to the task, nor should they try.

I actually liked the non-action scenes in QoS. It's just kind of weird to come out of a Bond saying, "It would've been a lot better if they'd left out all the fights and chases."

But as this thread demonstrates, the perception of how well this scene works differs markedly from one person to the next, so whether something "works" or not is highly subjective and a matter of personal perception/opinion.

Indeed, and I don't think I'd bother myself with it at all except for that nagging feeling that the world has past me by, that I've passed my sell-by date and joined that crowd of crusty pensioners who moan, "it's too fast!" It worries me that people can comprehend this stuff when I can't, since the writing is on the wall; this is the way all movies may look, and soon.

I am somewhat heartened by all the posts here that say it took repeat viewings to "get" the action, because it means at least my brain isn't wired differently to every other viewer's. On the other hand, it does indicate a shift in what people are willing to put up with, a shift I haven't been able to make. I would modify your comment to say that "whether it's acceptable to present a work that requires repeat viewings to comprehend is a matter of personal perception/opinion."

Or as a (lame) McCartney song once said, "what good is art if it hurts your head?"

[Judo chop]

On the other hand, it does indicate a shift in what people are willing to put up with, a shift I haven't been able to make.

I’m in agreement, except that I’m not worried. I believe herky-jerky is a fad, plain and simple. Like the first coming of 3-D, people will start to see the gimmickry in it and demand something else. Or if nothing so democratic, otherwise capable directors will tire of being the next in line.

It does put one in the mix of things, but it is clearly being abused these days. A scene in which someone is blindsided, mugged and knocked unconscious might call for such an approach – or forget that stupid example and just consider the tasteful use of it as Bond is dragged from the record-beating car wreck in CR - but as a general rule, such a technique should be the exception.

In this regard, I do believe QOS pushed an envelope which should have remained in the mailbox. Only the car chase (the topic of this thread) is excused, in my opinion. Forster made the call that he wanted QOS to “drop right into the action”, and that is exactly what he achieved at the onset. But he kept dropping, scene after scene, belying the claim that it was all about stylistic choice to put us in a particular moment, and instead strongly suggesting that QOS was merely, thoughtlessly, following a trend.

But I won’t zing the car chase because the chase/ropes or boat or Tosca chase sequences were mishandled. The car chase is innocent.

[Robinson]

I also liked that there were no explosions.

Well, there was the Eco-Hotel, and Bond's plane didn't exactly crumple into thin air. I do appreciate the efforts to downplay explosions in the Craig films though, it's rather refreshing.

To clarify, I meant that I liked the fact that there were no explosions during the PTS. It's almost a cliche nowadays that cars explode on impact.

I'll give it to Forster for handling the PTS in this manner. Films like RONIN and THE BOURNE SUPREMACY made car chases exciting again by placing the camera and the actors in the vehicle. I like how this chase was done with Craig truly integrated into action. I also thought that placing the action on a crowded motorway was an effective way to make the chase "even" between the Aston Martin and the Alfa Romeo vehicles.

[sharpshooter]

To clarify, I meant that I liked the fact that there were no explosions during the PTS. It's almost a cliche nowadays that cars explode on impact.

Indeed. MythBusters did a show on this type of thing. It is extremely rare for a car to explode on impact. The gas tank is in a very well protected position and is generally barely damaged.

[Safari Suit]

Mythbusters? Phfft! Arnie taught us it in Last Action Hero

[plankattack]

I actually liked the non-action scenes in QoS. It's just kind of weird to come out of a Bond saying, "It would've been a lot better if they'd left out all the fights and chases."

Agreed. QoS's style, it's grasp for originality, are highlighted in the way the rest of the film is shot. How many of us don't like "Night at the Opera"? (I should be careful asking - maybe a lot?!?!). So much of the discussion over the last two years has grounded itself in dissection of the action and the pros and cons of the decisions made, that I do feel that it's taken away from some of the more subtle choices and directions taken by the film.

That being said, I'm with most everyone else in enjoying the PTS. I'm not going to dump on it for being Bradley/Greengrass etc - I think it's as good as any of the Bourne chases - manic, frantic, and not overly "staged". And the car chase is the one action sequence that, from the moment you decide to have one, is always going to put you in a box because it's all been done before. There's a lot of great ones in celluloid history, but for me, whenever forced to chose, it's back to Bullitt or The French Connection (and if you like those, check out the chase in The Seven-Ups with Roy Scheider, or in Robbery, a Peter Yates film based on the Great Train Robbery).

So the QoS PTS is another decent entry and as Bond car-chases alone go, arguably one of the best. And as a PTS, mercifully short! I myself tired of the "mini-movie" trend ages ago and enjoy the "back to the 60s" feel of both CR and QoS PTSs in their length and punchy "to-the-point"-ness.

[Quantumofsolace007]

I loved it was a great PTS and definitely Quantum Of Solace is one of my favorite bond movies.

[DaveBond21]

Bond would have found the car chase frantic and confusing, yes, but at least he could look out the windshield and see which way he was going. It would've helped if we'd been given the equivalent; a few more long shots of the cars and their positions relative to each other. The frustrating thing for me is that I really think the needed film is in the can already; they just left it out.

I agree it's a deliberate decision and not outright incompetence. It's obviously an attempt to be Paul Greengrass, but IMHO not everyone is up to the task, nor should they try.

I actually liked the non-action scenes in QoS. It's just kind of weird to come out of a Bond saying, "It would've been a lot better if they'd left out all the fights and chases."

But as this thread demonstrates, the perception of how well this scene works differs markedly from one person to the next, so whether something "works" or not is highly subjective and a matter of personal perception/opinion.

Indeed, and I don't think I'd bother myself with it at all except for that nagging feeling that the world has past me by, that I've passed my sell-by date and joined that crowd of crusty pensioners who moan, "it's too fast!" It worries me that people can comprehend this stuff when I can't, since the writing is on the wall; this is the way all movies may look, and soon.

I am somewhat heartened by all the posts here that say it took repeat viewings to "get" the action, because it means at least my brain isn't wired differently to every other viewer's. On the other hand, it does indicate a shift in what people are willing to put up with, a shift I haven't been able to make. I would modify your comment to say that "whether it's acceptable to present a work that requires repeat viewings to comprehend is a matter of personal perception/opinion."

Or as a (lame) McCartney song once said, "what good is art if it hurts your head?"

I agree with David M (and his wife) that the PTS is too confusing. The only good bit is the line at the end "Time to get out". Because even though many of us couldn't follow the chase, we can certainly imagine what kind of a ride Mr White has just had!

[David_M]

Because even though many of us couldn't follow the chase, we can certainly imagine what kind of a ride Mr White has just had!

Slewed around this way and that, subjected to tremendous noise without a decent view of what the deuce is going on...forget "imagine," Mr White and I had the same ride!

[Double-Oh Agent]

FWIW, films were shot in a particular way because often they were viewed only once or twice by the typical film-goer. We do live in a different age where repeat viewings are not only readily accessible (via DVD, etc.), but actually expected by the general public. And I think that has had an impact on how films, TV shows, etc., are written, filmed and edited.

I'll buy that up to a point. However there ought to be a way to make it work the first time AND give you more on repeat viewings.

I agree. I think "Casino Royale" achieved this admirably, "Quantum of Solace" less so. But I think the thing that "Quantum of Solace" did quite deliberately, as a stylistic choice, was to put the audience right in the moment with Bond. We think things are confusing? So would he, in those situations, and he's reacting based on instinct and training. It's only afterward that he would be able to sort it all out mentally, and that's what we in the audience do, too.

As a stylistic choice, I think this worked well in some scenes, not so well in others. But as this thread demonstrates, the perception of how well this scene works differs markedly from one person to the next, so whether something "works" or not is highly subjective and a matter of personal perception/opinion.

Sorry, but what is so confusing for Bond in the PTS? He's just kidnapped Mr. White and White's/Quantum's thugs are chasing him, which they would do if they spotted him leaving their boss' estate and leaving behind a trail of blood on the driveway. There should be no confusion for Bond there. You could possibly make a case for him being confused in the fight/chase after Mitchell, but certainly not the car chase. The car chase is pretty straight-forward to me. As a result, there is no need for the stylistic choice to make the viewer feel Bond's "confusion" because he has none. The bad guys are after him and he needs to get away. Nothing difficult to understand there. The shaky cam/super quick editing just doesn't work for the scene and isn't appropriate to his state of mind.