148 replies to this topic

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

Sorry I'm still not buying it.

Just because you don't enjoy the film, automatically means Forster's intention was to put his stamp on the film and not caring if it was Bond or not. He came into the series like every director does, to try and make a good Bond film that the masses enjoy.

The World is Not Enough is my least favorite Bond film, I admit that. However I would never for a minute suggest that Apted's sole intention with the film was to muck about and changes things.

There were many Bond films I didn't enjoy, like A View to a Kill and some parts of Die Another Day, for instance. But, as "bad" as they were, they felt Bondian. While I watch them, I say... "This is sooo boring...", "Moore is too old", or "Invisible car for God's sake!". But they were still "Bond films". I didn't felt A View to a Kill and Die Another Day as "A John Glen film" or "A Lee Tamahori film", those were "James Bond films directed by Lee Tamahori or John Glen". Quantum of Solace is just "A Marc Forster film, starring a British agent named James Bond who has contemporized and acts like Mr Bourne."

[DaveBond21]

I guess one thing´s for sure: EON would NEVER have allowed Forster to do just a Forster film. They wanted him to do a Bond film. Which he did. With his personal ideas - as any director before him has done. In the end, it WAS a Bond film. Some like it, some don´t. But let´s be honest: how many Bond films are universally embraced by every fan, in the cinema and on a message board?

Indeed. Nothing is universally embraced on a message board.




-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Dustin]

Another question: did Forster put his stamp on QOS? What is that, his "stamp"? I didn't detect a distinguishing mark that tells me 'This is a Marc Forster film!'
What I did see was a number of allusions and homages, but they are hardly a Forster thingy, nor is the camera work or editing. So I'm at a loss, what's The Mark of the Forster ™ supposed to be?

Edited by Dustin, 07 September 2011 - 04:46 AM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

So I'm at a loss, what's The Mark of the Forster ™ supposed to be?

Merely an absurd turn-of-phrase, I suppose...

[Dustin]

I don't know, perhaps I just don't get it.

To me neither The Kite Runner nor Monster's Ball is anything like QOS. I doubt I would watch any of these films without further information and think QOS was done by the same guy who directed the first two. There is the odd nod to another director but that's about it for me. If anything QOS lacks a distinctive stamp IMO.

[Miles Miservy]

RI and Georgia don't hold a candle to Florida. Don't believe me? Look up Florida's early history, especially when the Spanish were in total control of St. Augustine, slaughteringHuguenots in the 1740's

Or how about Louisiana and Mississippi during the Civil Rights movement?

ENOUGH of the territorial markings gentlemen. Although I admit the history is interesting to a degree, we're here to discuss James Bond.

That's absolutely fascinating because now, Florida is under the control of illegal immigrants from Cuba & old retired Jewish people just waiting to die.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

So I'm at a loss, what's The Mark of the Forster ™ supposed to be?

Merely an absurd turn-of-phrase, I suppose...

"Check Your Fail" is an absurd turn-of-phrase. I tought you were American. It's ashaming an Argentinean has to explain you that "fail" is a verb, and "failiure" is a noun.

One is never too old to learn from a master, son

PS. "T minus -63 points and counting."

[JimmyBond]

PS. "T minus -63 points and counting."

Bit of a low blow, especially when one considers that Mr. B has such a low reputation because certain individuals are going around adding negatives to anything he posts.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

PS. "T minus -63 points and counting."

Bit of a low blow, especially when one considers that Mr. B has such a low reputation because certain individuals are going around adding negatives to anything he posts.

And what was HE doing in the first place?!?!?

"Start losing, Mr Blofeld."

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

If anything QOS lacks a distinctive stamp IMO.

True. Because QOS it's only a mashup between Bourne type of action and arty cliches (Oh, we're going to have one scene for each of the four elements, just 'cause it will look so artistic and different from the previous Bond movies).

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 09 September 2011 - 12:48 AM.

[JimmyBond]

PS. "T minus -63 points and counting."

Bit of a low blow, especially when one considers that Mr. B has such a low reputation because certain individuals are going around adding negatives to anything he posts.

And what was HE doing in the first place?!?!?

"Start losing, Mr Blofeld."

Not familiar with the term "Being the better man" are you?

[blueman]

I don't know, perhaps I just don't get it.

To me neither The Kite Runner nor Monster's Ball is anything like QOS. I doubt I would watch any of these films without further information and think QOS was done by the same guy who directed the first two. There is the odd nod to another director but that's about it for me. If anything QOS lacks a distinctive stamp IMO.

Interesting. I think of Monster's Ball and Stranger Than Fiction (haven't seen Kite Runner) as directorially similar in how the stories are told onscreen, all are very visually driven - which IMHO is the stamp Forster put on QOS, it's perhaps the most stamped Bond film because of the sense of visuals and how they relate to pushing the story forward in his direction. Works like gangbusters for me, not so much for others (c'est la vie ).

[SecretAgentFan]

PS. "T minus -63 points and counting."

Bit of a low blow, especially when one considers that Mr. B has such a low reputation because certain individuals are going around adding negatives to anything he posts.

And what was HE doing in the first place?!?!?

"Start losing, Mr Blofeld."

Not familiar with the term "Being the better man" are you?

Also, never underestimate the "playground"-aspect of an internet forum. HE DID IT FIRST! NO, YOU DID IT FIRST! NO, YOU ARE STUPID! NO, YOU ARE EVEN MORE STUPIDER! NO, IT IS NOT STUPIDER, IT´S MORE STUPID, YOU IDIOT! NO, YOU ARE THE IDIOT! DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT IDIOT MEANS? And so on...

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

PS. "T minus -63 points and counting."

Bit of a low blow, especially when one considers that Mr. B has such a low reputation because certain individuals are going around adding negatives to anything he posts.

And what was HE doing in the first place?!?!?

"Start losing, Mr Blofeld."

Not familiar with the term "Being the better man" are you?

Also, never underestimate the "playground"-aspect of an internet forum. HE DID IT FIRST! NO, YOU DID IT FIRST! NO, YOU ARE STUPID! NO, YOU ARE EVEN MORE STUPIDER! NO, IT IS NOT STUPIDER, IT´S MORE STUPID, YOU IDIOT! NO, YOU ARE THE IDIOT! DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT IDIOT MEANS? And so on...

Look, even when I saw members saying things like "Quantum of Solace is the best film" and "Forster is a legend, blah blah blah", I NEVER rate them down, just because they weren't rude to me and I tought they shouldn't get a - (whatever) reputation because they weren't rude to me. But times have changed, and everytime I wrote my opinion (say, "Campbell, Brosnan, Casino Royale, GoldenEye were awesome. Forster and Quantum of Solace were bad" I got undeserved - reputations. So I thing it's time to settle the score.

Blofeld, where are you? you're quick to bully but you run away after leaving that comment... "Looking at our present situation, strictly as a forum member, I'd say that the numbers are not on your side."

[Lachesis]

It's high time to move on, whatever a person's view of Quantum of Solace is, including Mr Cambell, its just an opinion - whether you consider it the greatest or the worse or somewhere in between you are neither wrong nor right, its simply how it appeals to the individual tastes and expectations you have of Bond. There are 21 other Eon films if you don't like it and another in production that, given the time delay, could be as different again. We may all be Bond fans here, but we are still all different.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Three weeks off the board have given me a sense of clarity; I didn't want to comment until asked to. I'm attempting impartiality; it's quite refreshing.

[JimmyBond]

PS. "T minus -63 points and counting."

Bit of a low blow, especially when one considers that Mr. B has such a low reputation because certain individuals are going around adding negatives to anything he posts.

And what was HE doing in the first place?!?!?

"Start losing, Mr Blofeld."

Not familiar with the term "Being the better man" are you?

Also, never underestimate the "playground"-aspect of an internet forum. HE DID IT FIRST! NO, YOU DID IT FIRST! NO, YOU ARE STUPID! NO, YOU ARE EVEN MORE STUPIDER! NO, IT IS NOT STUPIDER, IT´S MORE STUPID, YOU IDIOT! NO, YOU ARE THE IDIOT! DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT IDIOT MEANS? And so on...

Look, even when I saw members saying things like "Quantum of Solace is the best film" and "Forster is a legend, blah blah blah", I NEVER rate them down, just because they weren't rude to me and I tought they shouldn't get a - (whatever) reputation because they weren't rude to me. But times have changed, and everytime I wrote my opinion (say, "Campbell, Brosnan, Casino Royale, GoldenEye were awesome. Forster and Quantum of Solace were bad" I got undeserved - reputations. So I thing it's time to settle the score.

Blofeld, where are you? you're quick to bully but you run away after leaving that comment... "Looking at our present situation, strictly as a forum member, I'd say that the numbers are not on your side."

Apparently you're also not familiar with the phrase "Taking the high road."

In your attempts to "get him back" you are making yourself look quite the immature fool.

[Righty007]

Three weeks off the board have given me a sense of clarity; I didn't want to comment until asked to. I'm attempting impartiality; it's quite refreshing.

[George88]

Oh for pete's sake give it a rest, you lot.

[Capsule in Space]

Oh for pete's sake give it a rest, you lot.

Martin Campbell and Marc Forster: A pox on both your houses. Campbell isn't as good as he thinks. He ruined his own pre-title sequence in GoldenEye by having that stupid scene where Bond flies off of a motorcycle and into a plane (if Bond can fly then why does he need a plane anyway?). Casino Royale is too long and too boring. He said all of this stuff about Forster while promoting The Green Lantern, which was a clunker. Campbell throws stones from a glass house.

George88: Hi! Are you still at Bond and Beyond and DCiNB? I only see you here at CBn. What do you think of the of the other forums? What are your thoughts on the current state of CBn?

[blueman]

I like where this thread is going!

[George88]

George88: Hi! Are you still at Bond and Beyond and DCiNB? I only see you here at CBn. What do you think of the of the other forums? What are your thoughts on the current state of CBn?

DCiNB yes, Bond and Beyond - no, never joined, or not yet.

The other forums are other forums on which people pass the time expressing their views. They look slightly different to one another.

The current state of CBn is fine; stop stirring.

[Capsule in Space]

George88: Hi! Are you still at Bond and Beyond and DCiNB? I only see you here at CBn. What do you think of the of the other forums? What are your thoughts on the current state of CBn?

DCiNB yes, Bond and Beyond - no, never joined, or not yet.

The other forums are other forums on which people pass the time expressing their views. They look slightly different to one another.

The current state of CBn is fine; stop stirring.

Oh, I thought you had stated that you joined Bond and Beyond.

Stop stirring what?

[Colorshade]

I guess one thing´s for sure: EON would NEVER have allowed Forster to do just a Forster film. They wanted him to do a Bond film.

'
I don't think so, they were very sloppy with the handling of it. They sacked (?) Daniel Kleinman, and we have got the most unspectacular gunbarrel ever. It doesn't even move, it's just a picture slapped on. When you fail with the gunbarrel... I have no words.

I'm guessing David Arnold will be leaving for the next Bond film.

Edited by Colorshade, 21 September 2011 - 04:24 AM.

[JimmyBond]

Nobody sacked Kleinman. He wasn't asked back sure, but that in no way implies he was fired. Just because Forster decided not to hire him this time around doesn't mean anything. Boy some people make the weirdest inferences based on the oddest things sometimes.

[SecretAgentFan]

I am resurrecting this wonderful thread just to apologize to Mr.Campbell.

I have just seen GREEN LANTERN.

And I loved it.

Pure fun. A superhero movie that does not take itself too seriously, well paced, just does its job and has no pretensions of having to be important or genre-bending.

I am sorry that I was influenced by the bad press. I guess most people were. GREEN LANTERN is a real treat. I found it more entertaining than THOR or the IRON MAN movies.

So... Mr.Campbell, once again, sorry.

[Napoleon Solo]

I am resurrecting this wonderful thread just to apologize to Mr.Campbell.

I have just seen GREEN LANTERN.

And I loved it.

Pure fun. A superhero movie that does not take itself too seriously, well paced, just does its job and has no pretensions of having to be important or genre-bending.

I am sorry that I was influenced by the bad press. I guess most people were. GREEN LANTERN is a real treat. I found it more entertaining than THOR or the IRON MAN movies.

So... Mr.Campbell, once again, sorry.

A friend of mine (who's a big fan of Green Lantern comic books and eagerly awaited this movie) asked me what I thought. I had seen Thor and this year's X-Men movie before seeing GL. My reaction was they were of similar quality, you could reasonably make the case that any of the three were somewhat better than antoher, but the overall quality was pretty similar.

Yet, Green Lantern got lots of criticism, the other two had a much better reaction. Maybe it was Ryan Reynolds fatigue. Maybe it was movie critics getting tired of having to see three comic book based movies within a month and a half. I enjoyed Campbell's Green Lantern film just fine.

[Lachesis]

I am resurrecting this wonderful thread just to apologize to Mr.Campbell.

I have just seen GREEN LANTERN.

And I loved it.

Pure fun. A superhero movie that does not take itself too seriously, well paced, just does its job and has no pretensions of having to be important or genre-bending.

I am sorry that I was influenced by the bad press. I guess most people were. GREEN LANTERN is a real treat. I found it more entertaining than THOR or the IRON MAN movies.

So... Mr.Campbell, once again, sorry.

A friend of mine (who's a big fan of Green Lantern comic books and eagerly awaited this movie) asked me what I thought. I had seen Thor and this year's X-Men movie before seeing GL. My reaction was they were of similar quality, you could reasonably make the case that any of the three were somewhat better than antoher, but the overall quality was pretty similar.

Yet, Green Lantern got lots of criticism, the other two had a much better reaction. Maybe it was Ryan Reynolds fatigue. Maybe it was movie critics getting tired of having to see three comic book based movies within a month and a half. I enjoyed Campbell's Green Lantern film just fine.

Certainly agree here, I am quite bewildered at the criticism GL recieved, I did marginally prefer Thor and First Class but niether by very much and I thought Captian America was appreciably worse than all of them (it just didn't spark into life for me).

[Mr. Blofeld]

Oh, for...

Just let it die, already.