Well I enjoyed QOS. I could see why people may have disliked it. For me, the frenetic, lean, tunnel vision style of film worked well in expressing Bond's obsession with revenge and finding out the truth. In CR I felt as if I was an observer, watching events unfold. With QOS, we see things from Bond's point of view...he is obsessed, totally focused on his mission of personal revenge rationalized by his sense of "duty". I found it a very effective way of telling this particular type of story.
Bella_docQuantum's next target (Canada)Posts: 51MI6 Agent
So here’s the thing. I saw QoS twice now as I wanted to give it a second chance before I made up my mind about it. I’m still on the fence about some things and can see the points that others here have been making, but as a huge fan of CR I must say this was frustrating. Whenever I think of something I liked about it (ex. ¾ of the title sequence) I’m reminded of the letdown that followed next (ex. last ¼ of title sequence-- the abstract desert motif suddenly replaced by random nudes, wtf?).
On to the review.
I won’t mention He Who Must Not Be Named but the action sequences had his amnesiac fingerprints all over them 8-) You could barely tell what was going on or how the characters got from one point to the next, and worst of all this claustrophobic approach meant that you had no time to appreciate the careful stunt-work that *I hear* went into the sequences –no jaw-dropping moments, no clever ingenuity, no pause for suspense, and no sense that the people chasing each other on boats/planes/rooftops were actually human. The fight in the hotel room was the only real stand-out action scene for me –made you feel it, it did
If I had to put my finger on it, I’d say the reason that the action in QoS feels so random and generic is because the characters themselves seem forget about it the moment it’s over. It's all cause and effect really. In CR you had the parkour chase (effect: Bond almost gets sacked and Le Chiffre has to find a new bomber, thus leading to…) the Miami Airport sequence (effect: Le Chiffre loses his clients’ money an has to stage a poker tournament to win it back, leading to…) the sinking house in Venice (effect: Bond 22). But what do we get in QoS ? Roof-top chase (effect: Mitchell dies, thus proving Quantum has people everywhere –only Mr. White already told us that before the whole foot-chase even started 8-)), boat fight (effect: um…), and airplane fight/parachute jump (effect: Bond finds that Greene’s hoarding water, but nobody listens to him 8-)). Bottom line: if the action doesn’t serve the plot or is at least spectacular to look at, then the whole movie feels just ho-hum.
What else… Well, Mathis dies a degrading death at the hands of some pigs and then is dumped in a, uh, garbage dump, all which I wouldn’t have minded so much if his death was at least meaningful and tied into the main Quantum arc – anything other than dying because Bond left him alone at the party for 5 minutes 8-) The same thing goes for Fields, whose character could’ve been fleshed out more and even served a purpose beyond that of the “Oilfinger” shot –though on the one hand I can buy Greene/Elvis pettily offing her just because she tripped him on the stairs…
…Which brings us to Greene, who I must say I liked as a villain/stepping-stone in the Quantum hierarchy. He and Le Chiffre fit in well with the whole “banality of evil” that seems to be Quantum’s motto, so kudos. And to everyone who complains about him being too weak etc., come on –this guy actually fought back! I don’t mind the absence of the megalomaniac take-over-the-world-type villains and so far much prefer the small snivelling bully type –you never know what they’ll do when they’re cornered )
What else… Olga was surprisingly good in her role, and even though I could smell the whole Inigo-Montoya-you-killed-my-father-prepare-to-die thing a mile away I never felt manipulated into caring about her character. She also could have been fleshed out more and her parallel with Bond’s revenge quest could have resonated deeper (It's called *dialogue* P&W, try it 8-)) but on the whole that was okay.
What was not okay was Wright’s Leiter, who I found dour and unsinteresting Perhaps he might’ve come on better if not for his Bumbling American Stereotype of a partner, but the whole CIA thing felt tacked on for the sake of politics -–I mean, MI-6 sends a whole squadron just to capture one agent but the Yanks have only two agents holed up in Bolivia. Right….
On that note, I’m not sure I like how slow and clueless Mi-6 is these days. Bond may be a one-man army but he fights for Queen and Country. The existence of a leak at MI-6 should mean the possibility of interesting new alliances/internal politicking but it shouldn’t mean JB going off on his own. Now that he's got the solo revenge quest out of his system, hopefully things will be back to normal in Bond 23.
One other thing I liked was the continuity from CR and I think QoS did a good job of tying up the loose ends. That’s why I don’t mind all the unanswered questions at the end, as it sets up for an intriguing B23. However, I see a major problem in making Vesper’s boyfriend a “playa” --it makes her character seem stupid and undermines Bond’s mourning of her death. Thoughts, anyone ? ?:)
That’s all I can think of right now that bugged, but I’m sure the rest of it will come to me Instead of ending on a downer I will give special praise to the opera sequence, which was absolutely BRILLIANT!!!
Well I enjoyed QOS. I could see why people may have disliked it. For me, the frenetic, lean, tunnel vision style of film worked well in expressing Bond's obsession with revenge and finding out the truth. In CR I felt as if I was an observer, watching events unfold. With QOS, we see things from Bond's point of view...he is obsessed, totally focused on his mission of personal revenge rationalized by his sense of "duty". I found it a very effective way of telling this particular type of story.
I find it pointless to create a "frenetic, tunnel vision style" which leaves a great amount of people disoriented and bored.
It is not a classy Bond element, it is more an element of competing film productions and it did not touch me at all.
So, I have not been able to feel "his obsession with revenge and finding out the truth" at all, it left me and my company absolutely untouched.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Well I enjoyed QOS. I could see why people may have disliked it. For me, the frenetic, lean, tunnel vision style of film worked well in expressing Bond's obsession with revenge and finding out the truth. In CR I felt as if I was an observer, watching events unfold. With QOS, we see things from Bond's point of view...he is obsessed, totally focused on his mission of personal revenge rationalized by his sense of "duty". I found it a very effective way of telling this particular type of story.
I find it pointless to create a "frenetic, tunnel vision style" which leaves a great amount of people disoriented and bored.
You mean all those people who went and saw it this past weekend? When I left the theatre (both times), no one asked me if was disoriented or bored, not sure how you can make such a broad claim (unless you have info you're not sharing :v ).
All opinions are valid, as they are a matter of personal taste and sensibilities. Apparently the general movie going public are interested in seeing this film as they are coming out in great numbers...but that still doesn't invalidate anyone's opinion, negative or otherwise. I actually would prefer EON not repeat this style of film making for Bond 23. It worked for me for the type of story QOS was, but I'd like to see (for lack of a better description) the "modern classic" approach that was used in CR return. The nice thing about Bond is, whatever your feelings about QOS are...there will be another one in two years that might be more to your liking. As we always love to hear, "James Bond will be back".{[]
You mean all those people who went and saw it this past weekend? When I left the theatre (both times), no one asked me if was disoriented or bored, not sure how you can make such a broad claim (unless you have info you're not sharing :v ).
well, I am sure, if you read some reviews here on the board, you may find some of them.
and thanks HowardB, I totally agree with you on your last statement. My comment was not there to invalidate your comment either, I hope, that you took it like this.
I am not a QoS hater, I find it an acceptable modern action movie, but I expect more from a James Bond movie.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Um, anyone can go see QOS and like it, not like it, anything in between, sure. Just odd to make a claim that lots of people are feeling so-and-so about it - unless one happens to be taking exit polls. If not then it's conjecture at best, projection most likely. All we know for certain about QOS at this point is: it's doing great heaping wads of business all over the place; and both the fanbase and the reviewing community are not just split on it but incredibly polar about QOS. Oh yes, and that James Bond will return. :007)
Um, anyone can go see QOS and like it, not like it, anything in between, sure. Just odd to make a claim that lots of people are feeling so-and-so about it - unless one happens to be taking exit polls. If not then it's conjecture at best, projection most likely. All we know for certain about QOS at this point is: it's doing great heaping wads of business all over the place; and both the fanbase and the reviewing community are not just split on it but incredibly polar about QOS. Oh yes, and that James Bond will return. :007)
I am not sure, what's wrong with you blueman.
I was trying to describe, how some people felt after QoS, people here on the board as well as people, who went with us to the movie and talked about their feelings in a pub afterwards.
I am sure, that you are scientifically backed-up with every claim, that you are making here :v
One would think all Fleming ever wrote was fluffy kittens and cheerful winks the way some of the reviewers go on about missing traditional Bond stuff.
I am sure, that you have started an exit-poll on reviewers, who were missing traditional James Bond elements on this question to claim this.
I could continue...
And another thing:
To my opinion, and it's really only an opinion:
Don't we sometimes overinerprete a little the hidden winks, especially in QoS.
I mean, with over 45 years and 21 movies, almost everything has been there and seeing everything as an hommage or a counter-hommage to underline the "new" James Bond appears sometimes laughable to me.
8 months ago, someone stated, that the colour of the Aston Martin is charcoal to express the darker tone of his personality.
Well, this could be the case, it may be, that the new colour should just give a clue, that his DBS has been replaced not to raise questions like: "how did he get back his car so quickly etc."
Or maybe Aston Martin thought, that it just looks better in almost black....
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
What was not okay was Wright’s Leiter, who I found dour and unsinteresting Perhaps he might’ve come on better if not for his Bumbling American Stereotype of a partner, but the whole CIA thing felt tacked on for the sake of politics -–I mean, MI-6 sends a whole squadron just to capture one agent but the Yanks have only two agents holed up in Bolivia.
I really disliked Leiter in this film as he continued the attitude that was set up in CR of being irritable and, quite frankly, pathetic...definitely not the way Fleming envisioned the character. Leiter was basically a breath of fresh air for Bond - relaxed, friendly, and competent. This new Leiter is a sourpuss who helps Bond not out of loyalty but because Leiter can't help himself.
Well I'm not into writing long reviews of my opinion, in fact I'm replying to this on my BlackBerry so to do so would be a pain.
I just wanted to say I can honestly not think of a Bond film that has more polarized reviews and divided the Bond nation, both hardcore and casual fan alike. Personally I loved QOS, I think it is a very unique entry into the franchise. Would I like to see every Bond movie done this way from now on? Absoluetly not, but I enjoyed this one for what it was.
One thing seems to be certain, you're either on one side of the line or the other.
It will be very interesting to revisit QOS after Bond 23 or all the Craig Bonds as a whole when all is said and done. I'm not comparing QOS with OHMSS, but my opinion of OHMSS has changed considerably over time. When I first saw OHMSS in '68 I was very luke warm about it (too caught up in the depression over the departure of Connery). This is getting quite a bit off topic (but an interesting thought nonetheless). Imagine OHMSS with Craig instead of George Lazenby.......
Oh, I have! And Lazenby's young fresh faced naivety would work better for CR imo, you can see him going gung ho chasing the bomber in the foot chase far more imo.
For Craig in OHMSS, check out Elizabeth where his assassin has a beach fight like in the OHMSS pre-credits...
I'm not a big Lazenby fan. Looked perfect, great in action scenes, but as soon as he opened his mouth to act.... But I'm not here to pick on George. OHMSS with Craig would have been amazing. Just wanted to mention something that has gone a bit unmentioned in these QOS reviews...the performance of Jesper Christianson as Mr. White. He doesn't have much screen time in QOS, but when he is on screen he's quite riveting and charismatic(and has a great line in the opera scene). I get the feeling that we have not seen the last of Mr. White. He'd make a great main villain.
Bond, and a very thin girl plummets from a few thousand feet in QoS and a few moments later they are walking around and climbing heaps of rock. This is the single biggest problem in QoS. Forget the loud moans from critics regarding the Bradley/Bourne shaky cam, the supposed lack of plot, Craig being too cold and ruthless, Mathis being dumped in a garbage truck, Dominic being too non-existent, too much action, etc.
This one scene is where it all falls apart for me. The aftermath of the freefall scene. The plane sequence was well-done, we had elements of realism, the bad guys came from nowhere and took the audience by suprise, the engine burning out wasn't that badly done, the CGI was passable, hell - even the freefall scene had me still glued to the screen, my hands gripped to the chair. It was done in a realistic fashion, seeing the faces contort with the wind. And then the parachute opens a couple of metres from the ground, and....
They collapse on the floor. At that moment, silence fell in the cinema. Are they both ok? Did they make it? Are they still alive? Or are they both fine, right as rain and we are suddenly back in DAD territory again?
Unfortunately, it was the latter.
After all that hard work done beforehand too in CR - Bond hesitating before crane jumping, Bond dazed and bloodied after the stairwell fight, Bond examining his wounds in the bathroom while necking a glass of bourbon, Bond passing out on the grass after the car crash, Bond half-dead on the back seat of Le Chiffre's car, Bond nervous before the torture scene, Bond screaming out in pain, Bond recovering in hospital. Even in QoS this continues. Bond looking perturbed in the car chase, looking dusty, bloody and knackered, Bond tying cloth around his arm wound in Slate's apartment, Bond gasping for breath during the plane scene.
The omission of them both recovering after the freefall is criminal in my book, and strips away all the hard work achieved with the reboot process by EON up until this moment in the film. Without that crucial scene, the film crashed right back down to the bottom of the barrel with a bang, far louder and harder than Bond and Camille's freefall.
What was Forster thinking? Seeing that moment again for the third time suddenly made me very angry, as I doubt Campbell would have allowed that to happen in CR, and given that we are within the same realistic confines in QoS, it seemed shoddy that Forster thought he could get away with it. X-(
given that we are within the same realistic confines in QoS, it seemed shoddy that Forster thought he could get away with it. X-(
As long as we're in the realm of realistic confines, I'll share the moment I lost confidence...it was during the boat sequence when Bond attaches a grappling hook to the villian's boat and it gets suddenly yanked backwards. What was that? I turned to my friend and asked "what was that attached to?" He laughed and shrugged and answered "The sea floor!" )
Movie magic ladies and gentleman, movie magic lol.
IMO QOS is a documentary compared to most of the other Bond films. But the free fall scene, after a pretty well staged dogfight was more than a bit out of place with all the brutal mayhem that preceded it. It would have been nice if the writers could have come up with a better, more original, somewhat more believable escape. I liked QOS very much, but it's not a perfect film. I still believe as a whole, it's strengths far outweigh its weaknesses.
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
I'll admit I liked the DC3 dogfight but the free-fall sequence/instant recovery was poor. I'd rather Bond & Camille both grabbed the parachute and dived out, then glided safely into the sinkhole. Also a slightly extended pre-creds leading into the interrogation sequence and a slowed down gunbarrel.
Yes, I agree that Mr. White had far too little screen time. I wanted to see that interrogation scene developed much more than it actually was.
Anyway, I'm sure Mr. White will pop up again in a future film.
Yup, Jesper Christensen completely stole both scenes he was in. Desperately underused, and with any hope - any - we've got him as Mr Baddie in the future.
(Oh, and great review, frostbitten -{ )
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I can't believe they wouldn't use Jesper Christiansen again. He needs to be a major part of the next one, in my opinion.
Talk about "unfinished business!" :007)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Um, anyone can go see QOS and like it, not like it, anything in between, sure. Just odd to make a claim that lots of people are feeling so-and-so about it - unless one happens to be taking exit polls. If not then it's conjecture at best, projection most likely. All we know for certain about QOS at this point is: it's doing great heaping wads of business all over the place; and both the fanbase and the reviewing community are not just split on it but incredibly polar about QOS. Oh yes, and that James Bond will return. :007)
I am not sure, what's wrong with you blueman.
I was trying to describe, how some people felt after QoS, people here on the board as well as people, who went with us to the movie and talked about their feelings in a pub afterwards.
I am sure, that you are scientifically backed-up with every claim, that you are making here :v
One would think all Fleming ever wrote was fluffy kittens and cheerful winks the way some of the reviewers go on about missing traditional Bond stuff.
I am sure, that you have started an exit-poll on reviewers, who were missing traditional James Bond elements on this question to claim this.
I could continue...
And another thing:
To my opinion, and it's really only an opinion:
Don't we sometimes overinerprete a little the hidden winks, especially in QoS.
I mean, with over 45 years and 21 movies, almost everything has been there and seeing everything as an hommage or a counter-hommage to underline the "new" James Bond appears sometimes laughable to me.
8 months ago, someone stated, that the colour of the Aston Martin is charcoal to express the darker tone of his personality.
Well, this could be the case, it may be, that the new colour should just give a clue, that his DBS has been replaced not to raise questions like: "how did he get back his car so quickly etc."
Or maybe Aston Martin thought, that it just looks better in almost black....
Hey bt, sorry if I came across as snarky, I dislike intensely broad comments like, "a great many people" think such-and such, especially if those great many are to be interpreted in any way as Bond fans: I'm one, and I can speak for myself just fine, thanks.
But I do I agree with you completely, there are lots of fans are up in arms about QOS - but seems just as many are in love with QOS. I don't see one side with a clear advantage over the other at this point (so leaving off one side of that equation will sound biased and agenda-driven to my ears, ie someone trying to make a point that Bond fans - no distinction - don't like QOS).
Nor can an assessment yet be made on the popularity (outside of Bond fandom) of QOS, gotta wait for final BO for that. Reviews are split as much as the fan base, but that hasn't translated to BO (indeed, QOS is doing biz like it's a four star film from everybody!).
I liked it, you didn't. Others posting here and elsewhere seem to fall into those camps pretty evenly. All else is conjecture or agenda or both.
What's odd about all this to me is the outright hate QOS is getting, from some fans and many reviewers who don't see their Bond in QOS, so see no Bond in QOS. At this point hard to tell which got/is getting more hate: DC's initial casting or QOS the film! Also that there's a lot of justification going on about the hate, ie it's not Bond, the producers are lost, Bond fans don't like it, etc. If you don't like it you don't like it, fair enough. I don't like a lot of Bond films, but can accept that they do work for many as acceptable Bond adventures - their Bond, so to speak. I preclude them, but nobody else has to. Trying to argue the relative merits of Bond is like trying to catch the wind with a net, just not gonna happen as Bond has evolved so much and been presented in so many ways - including this new way, which works for some, not for others, and seems to be immensely popular with the general public regardless.
I get where you're coming from I guess is what I'm trying to say, and apologies for the knee-jerk.
Bond, and a very thin girl plummets from a few thousand feet in QoS and a few moments later they are walking around and climbing heaps of rock. This is the single biggest problem in QoS. Forget the loud moans from critics regarding the Bradley/Bourne shaky cam, the supposed lack of plot, Craig being too cold and ruthless, Mathis being dumped in a garbage truck, Dominic being too non-existent, too much action, etc.
This one scene is where it all falls apart for me. The aftermath of the freefall scene. The plane sequence was well-done, we had elements of realism, the bad guys came from nowhere and took the audience by suprise, the engine burning out wasn't that badly done, the CGI was passable, hell - even the freefall scene had me still glued to the screen, my hands gripped to the chair. It was done in a realistic fashion, seeing the faces contort with the wind. And then the parachute opens a couple of metres from the ground, and....
They collapse on the floor. At that moment, silence fell in the cinema. Are they both ok? Did they make it? Are they still alive? Or are they both fine, right as rain and we are suddenly back in DAD territory again?
Unfortunately, it was the latter.
After all that hard work done beforehand too in CR - Bond hesitating before crane jumping, Bond dazed and bloodied after the stairwell fight, Bond examining his wounds in the bathroom while necking a glass of bourbon, Bond passing out on the grass after the car crash, Bond half-dead on the back seat of Le Chiffre's car, Bond nervous before the torture scene, Bond screaming out in pain, Bond recovering in hospital. Even in QoS this continues. Bond looking perturbed in the car chase, looking dusty, bloody and knackered, Bond tying cloth around his arm wound in Slate's apartment, Bond gasping for breath during the plane scene.
The omission of them both recovering after the freefall is criminal in my book, and strips away all the hard work achieved with the reboot process by EON up until this moment in the film. Without that crucial scene, the film crashed right back down to the bottom of the barrel with a bang, far louder and harder than Bond and Camille's freefall.
What was Forster thinking? Seeing that moment again for the third time suddenly made me very angry, as I doubt Campbell would have allowed that to happen in CR, and given that we are within the same realistic confines in QoS, it seemed shoddy that Forster thought he could get away with it. X-(
I quite like that scene, and the harsh landing seems fine to me (and very Bondian) - and I like they didn't have a longer recovery scene after, Camille cold and shaking serves that purpose just fine for me and keeps the plot moving IMO. Agree Campbell would've taken more time with it, but that's jst one his faults IMO. :v
glidrose, you must have a very selective memory, as many Bond fans have, in regards to Martin Campbell allowing implausible and silly set pieces. Especially in GoldenEye where Bond falls after a slowly nose diving airplane against a very fake mattpainting on rollers.
'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...'
glidrose, you must have a very selective memory, as many Bond fans have, in regards to Martin Campbell allowing implausible and silly set pieces. Especially in GoldenEye where Bond falls after a slowly nose diving airplane against a very fake mattpainting on rollers.
Comments
On to the review.
I won’t mention He Who Must Not Be Named but the action sequences had his amnesiac fingerprints all over them 8-) You could barely tell what was going on or how the characters got from one point to the next, and worst of all this claustrophobic approach meant that you had no time to appreciate the careful stunt-work that *I hear* went into the sequences –no jaw-dropping moments, no clever ingenuity, no pause for suspense, and no sense that the people chasing each other on boats/planes/rooftops were actually human. The fight in the hotel room was the only real stand-out action scene for me –made you feel it, it did
If I had to put my finger on it, I’d say the reason that the action in QoS feels so random and generic is because the characters themselves seem forget about it the moment it’s over. It's all cause and effect really. In CR you had the parkour chase (effect: Bond almost gets sacked and Le Chiffre has to find a new bomber, thus leading to…) the Miami Airport sequence (effect: Le Chiffre loses his clients’ money an has to stage a poker tournament to win it back, leading to…) the sinking house in Venice (effect: Bond 22). But what do we get in QoS ? Roof-top chase (effect: Mitchell dies, thus proving Quantum has people everywhere –only Mr. White already told us that before the whole foot-chase even started 8-)), boat fight (effect: um…), and airplane fight/parachute jump (effect: Bond finds that Greene’s hoarding water, but nobody listens to him 8-)). Bottom line: if the action doesn’t serve the plot or is at least spectacular to look at, then the whole movie feels just ho-hum.
What else… Well, Mathis dies a degrading death at the hands of some pigs and then is dumped in a, uh, garbage dump, all which I wouldn’t have minded so much if his death was at least meaningful and tied into the main Quantum arc – anything other than dying because Bond left him alone at the party for 5 minutes 8-) The same thing goes for Fields, whose character could’ve been fleshed out more and even served a purpose beyond that of the “Oilfinger” shot –though on the one hand I can buy Greene/Elvis pettily offing her just because she tripped him on the stairs…
…Which brings us to Greene, who I must say I liked as a villain/stepping-stone in the Quantum hierarchy. He and Le Chiffre fit in well with the whole “banality of evil” that seems to be Quantum’s motto, so kudos. And to everyone who complains about him being too weak etc., come on –this guy actually fought back!
What else… Olga was surprisingly good in her role, and even though I could smell the whole Inigo-Montoya-you-killed-my-father-prepare-to-die thing a mile away I never felt manipulated into caring about her character. She also could have been fleshed out more and her parallel with Bond’s revenge quest could have resonated deeper (It's called *dialogue* P&W, try it 8-)) but on the whole that was okay.
What was not okay was Wright’s Leiter, who I found dour and unsinteresting
On that note, I’m not sure I like how slow and clueless Mi-6 is these days. Bond may be a one-man army but he fights for Queen and Country. The existence of a leak at MI-6 should mean the possibility of interesting new alliances/internal politicking but it shouldn’t mean JB going off on his own. Now that he's got the solo revenge quest out of his system, hopefully things will be back to normal in Bond 23.
One other thing I liked was the continuity from CR and I think QoS did a good job of tying up the loose ends. That’s why I don’t mind all the unanswered questions at the end, as it sets up for an intriguing B23. However, I see a major problem in making Vesper’s boyfriend a “playa” --it makes her character seem stupid and undermines Bond’s mourning of her death. Thoughts, anyone ? ?:)
That’s all I can think of right now that bugged, but I’m sure the rest of it will come to me
More of that, please.
I find it pointless to create a "frenetic, tunnel vision style" which leaves a great amount of people disoriented and bored.
It is not a classy Bond element, it is more an element of competing film productions and it did not touch me at all.
So, I have not been able to feel "his obsession with revenge and finding out the truth" at all, it left me and my company absolutely untouched.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
This company of yours- does it have people everywhere?
You mean all those people who went and saw it this past weekend?
well, I am sure, if you read some reviews here on the board, you may find some of them.
and thanks HowardB, I totally agree with you on your last statement. My comment was not there to invalidate your comment either, I hope, that you took it like this.
I am not a QoS hater, I find it an acceptable modern action movie, but I expect more from a James Bond movie.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Yeah, all those people who've been to see it on the back of CR
No one is disputing that lots of people are going to see it. What is an issue is how many enjoyed it and how many repeat viewing there'll be.
I am not sure, what's wrong with you blueman.
I was trying to describe, how some people felt after QoS, people here on the board as well as people, who went with us to the movie and talked about their feelings in a pub afterwards.
I am sure, that you are scientifically backed-up with every claim, that you are making here :v
example:
I am sure, that you have started an exit-poll on reviewers, who were missing traditional James Bond elements on this question to claim this.
I could continue...
And another thing:
To my opinion, and it's really only an opinion:
Don't we sometimes overinerprete a little the hidden winks, especially in QoS.
I mean, with over 45 years and 21 movies, almost everything has been there and seeing everything as an hommage or a counter-hommage to underline the "new" James Bond appears sometimes laughable to me.
8 months ago, someone stated, that the colour of the Aston Martin is charcoal to express the darker tone of his personality.
Well, this could be the case, it may be, that the new colour should just give a clue, that his DBS has been replaced not to raise questions like: "how did he get back his car so quickly etc."
Or maybe Aston Martin thought, that it just looks better in almost black....
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
You bet!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I really disliked Leiter in this film as he continued the attitude that was set up in CR of being irritable and, quite frankly, pathetic...definitely not the way Fleming envisioned the character. Leiter was basically a breath of fresh air for Bond - relaxed, friendly, and competent. This new Leiter is a sourpuss who helps Bond not out of loyalty but because Leiter can't help himself.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I just wanted to say I can honestly not think of a Bond film that has more polarized reviews and divided the Bond nation, both hardcore and casual fan alike. Personally I loved QOS, I think it is a very unique entry into the franchise. Would I like to see every Bond movie done this way from now on? Absoluetly not, but I enjoyed this one for what it was.
One thing seems to be certain, you're either on one side of the line or the other.
For Craig in OHMSS, check out Elizabeth where his assassin has a beach fight like in the OHMSS pre-credits...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
You're not alone in thinking that, HowardB!
Anyway, I'm sure Mr. White will pop up again in a future film.
This one scene is where it all falls apart for me. The aftermath of the freefall scene. The plane sequence was well-done, we had elements of realism, the bad guys came from nowhere and took the audience by suprise, the engine burning out wasn't that badly done, the CGI was passable, hell - even the freefall scene had me still glued to the screen, my hands gripped to the chair. It was done in a realistic fashion, seeing the faces contort with the wind. And then the parachute opens a couple of metres from the ground, and....
They collapse on the floor. At that moment, silence fell in the cinema. Are they both ok? Did they make it? Are they still alive? Or are they both fine, right as rain and we are suddenly back in DAD territory again?
Unfortunately, it was the latter.
After all that hard work done beforehand too in CR - Bond hesitating before crane jumping, Bond dazed and bloodied after the stairwell fight, Bond examining his wounds in the bathroom while necking a glass of bourbon, Bond passing out on the grass after the car crash, Bond half-dead on the back seat of Le Chiffre's car, Bond nervous before the torture scene, Bond screaming out in pain, Bond recovering in hospital. Even in QoS this continues. Bond looking perturbed in the car chase, looking dusty, bloody and knackered, Bond tying cloth around his arm wound in Slate's apartment, Bond gasping for breath during the plane scene.
The omission of them both recovering after the freefall is criminal in my book, and strips away all the hard work achieved with the reboot process by EON up until this moment in the film. Without that crucial scene, the film crashed right back down to the bottom of the barrel with a bang, far louder and harder than Bond and Camille's freefall.
What was Forster thinking? Seeing that moment again for the third time suddenly made me very angry, as I doubt Campbell would have allowed that to happen in CR, and given that we are within the same realistic confines in QoS, it seemed shoddy that Forster thought he could get away with it. X-(
As long as we're in the realm of realistic confines, I'll share the moment I lost confidence...it was during the boat sequence when Bond attaches a grappling hook to the villian's boat and it gets suddenly yanked backwards. What was that? I turned to my friend and asked "what was that attached to?" He laughed and shrugged and answered "The sea floor!"
IMO QOS is a documentary compared to most of the other Bond films. But the free fall scene, after a pretty well staged dogfight was more than a bit out of place with all the brutal mayhem that preceded it. It would have been nice if the writers could have come up with a better, more original, somewhat more believable escape. I liked QOS very much, but it's not a perfect film. I still believe as a whole, it's strengths far outweigh its weaknesses.
(Oh, and great review, frostbitten -{ )
Talk about "unfinished business!" :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Thanks, M5! Glad you liked it.
I was a little p*ssed off after QoS, so sorry if I appeared to go a bit too much into ranting mode
Hey bt, sorry if I came across as snarky, I dislike intensely broad comments like, "a great many people" think such-and such, especially if those great many are to be interpreted in any way as Bond fans: I'm one, and I can speak for myself just fine, thanks.
But I do I agree with you completely, there are lots of fans are up in arms about QOS - but seems just as many are in love with QOS. I don't see one side with a clear advantage over the other at this point (so leaving off one side of that equation will sound biased and agenda-driven to my ears, ie someone trying to make a point that Bond fans - no distinction - don't like QOS).
Nor can an assessment yet be made on the popularity (outside of Bond fandom) of QOS, gotta wait for final BO for that. Reviews are split as much as the fan base, but that hasn't translated to BO (indeed, QOS is doing biz like it's a four star film from everybody!).
I liked it, you didn't. Others posting here and elsewhere seem to fall into those camps pretty evenly. All else is conjecture or agenda or both.
What's odd about all this to me is the outright hate QOS is getting, from some fans and many reviewers who don't see their Bond in QOS, so see no Bond in QOS. At this point hard to tell which got/is getting more hate: DC's initial casting or QOS the film! Also that there's a lot of justification going on about the hate, ie it's not Bond, the producers are lost, Bond fans don't like it, etc. If you don't like it you don't like it, fair enough. I don't like a lot of Bond films, but can accept that they do work for many as acceptable Bond adventures - their Bond, so to speak. I preclude them, but nobody else has to. Trying to argue the relative merits of Bond is like trying to catch the wind with a net, just not gonna happen as Bond has evolved so much and been presented in so many ways - including this new way, which works for some, not for others, and seems to be immensely popular with the general public regardless.
I get where you're coming from I guess is what I'm trying to say, and apologies for the knee-jerk.
I quite like that scene, and the harsh landing seems fine to me (and very Bondian) - and I like they didn't have a longer recovery scene after, Camille cold and shaking serves that purpose just fine for me and keeps the plot moving IMO. Agree Campbell would've taken more time with it, but that's jst one his faults IMO. :v