To be honest, after all the talk of having a new gritty, human Bond, I was suprised at just how daft this film was. It's the closest you'll ever come to watching a big budget Cannon film starring Daniel Craig as Chuck Norris. I love daft action films so QOS is not without entertainment value but I have to also remember that it's a James Bond film. I love James Bond films because of their distinct style, design and fun. In the action landscape you always had the original screen hero - a charming, sophisticated counterpoint to more mundane and grubby heroes. So, as an action film, QOS is just about passable on the level of something like Sahara but not as sharp or enjoyable as a Shoot Em' Up. As a James Bond film though it's an average entry, feeling (to me) more like an action film starring Daniel Craig than a James Bond film. I don't want to bang on about Daniel Craig but I do find his everyman presence eliminates many aspects of the character that made me a James Bond fan in the first place.
Usually with a film you think about it for a review and a load of things spring to mind. With QOS I could barely remember half the film five minutes after walking out of the cinema. The lack of a gunbarrel in its proper place & the absence of the Bond theme isn't a great help and the title sequence is rubbish. Jack White's song is, in my opinion, the worst in the series by a considerable distance.
As someone who complained about the lack of a car chase in CR, I was pleased to see one hyped up for QOS. The end result though is not unlike much of QOS; loud and incomprehensible. It's obviously an attempt to top the chase at the end of the second Bourne film but bungled by a twitchy editing style. This process is repeated several times in the film with the footchase being a case in point. The editing made it difficult (for me anyway) to follow and it eventually falls apart completely with a CGI Daniel Craig crashing through a glass ceiling and dangling around on a load of ropes like Spider-Man.
The influence of Jason Bourne is very apparent in the film with three or four scenes lifted straight out of that rival spy series. It also has a comical Moonraker type scene with Daniel Craig falling out of an aeroplane in CGI and then dusting himself off on the ground without a mark and a pointless nod to Goldfinger with the lovely Gemma covered in oil. There are bits and pieces that reminded me of moments in other Bond films like TMWTGG (climax) and TSWLM (desert, throwing that bloke off a roof). I was suprised that Gemma, after all the publicity, got about three scenes and might as well have introduced herself as Felicity Bigknockers or something. She deserved a better character (and hairstyle) and proved in Tess of the D'Urbervilles she is a promising actress. Also, why would M send her to bring in this superhuman Bond? The weird random shots of the Palio horse race sum up the scattergun approach and rushed feeling to the film. It endlessly piles on the action and as I never really cared about Bond's quest or even had much idea of what was going on half the time I struggled to stay connected as Daniel Craig killed about 37 thousand people.
Strangely, I didn't mind Judi Dench too much in this one and Jeffrey Wright is competent in his brief bits as Felix. Mathieu Amalric was not much of a baddie and I never really cared what he was up to but Olga Kurylenko does ok as Camille and throws herself into the mayhem. The film looks quite sleek in places and it's a shame that these flourishes couldn't have been infused into a more coherent and substantial Bond film. There are also a tad too many pretentious touches for my tastes like the poncy fonts to indicate locations and the slo-mo opera shoot-out.
We all have our own tastes and preferences when it comes to James Bond but for me this new era just lacks charm and fun.
Anyone who has ever done serious therapy knows that Bond's problems - the pain that he is holding onto - could be healed quite quickly and easily - but because this is part of what drives the drama we need to overlook this for the sake of art.
Who needs serious therapy when you can go on a Robocop rampage and kill 37 thousand people? It's just as effective.
Anyone who has ever done serious therapy knows that Bond's problems - the pain that he is holding onto - could be healed quite quickly and easily - but because this is part of what drives the drama we need to overlook this for the sake of art.
Who needs serious therapy when you can go on a Robocop rampage and kill 37 thousand people? It's just as effective.
...There are also a tad too many pretentious touches for my tastes like the poncy fonts to indicate locations and the slo-mo opera shoot-out.
I loved the opera scene, but this was the one part that felt over-the-top and almost took me out of the movie. It would have been better to apply this excess of style to the many other parts of the movie which were severely lacking in it.
After all, this is what differentiates James Bond from the legions of graceless grunts who feature in 90% of action movies. I'm all for grit and realism, but if it's not done with class it's not quite Bond --QoS went too far in the former direction and ended up with the curious mixture of class and crass that we are all complaining about.
...There are also a tad too many pretentious touches for my tastes like the poncy fonts to indicate locations and the slo-mo opera shoot-out.
I loved the opera scene, but this was the one part that felt over-the-top and almost took me out of the movie. It would have been better to apply this excess of style to the many other parts of the movie which were severely lacking in it.
After all, this is what differentiates James Bond from the legions of graceless grunts who feature in 90% of action movies. I'm all for grit and realism, but if it's not done with class it's not quite Bond --QoS went too far in the former direction and ended up with the curious mixture of class and crass that we are all complaining about.
I agree...I felt the opera scene was not well done at all. Maybe it was the slo-mo (which I've come to despise in almost all forms), but it seemed like I was watching a perfume commercial. I would have been mesmerized if there was adequate story and plot to frame the drama of the moment.
Just back from the 5:00 p.m. showing and definitely conflicted about the movie. Their were parts that I liked and parts I did not. As an action movie I think it works, as a Bond movie it is lacking.
The opening PTS is dreadful, quick cuts of crashing cars and trucks, clutches and gear shifts, but we don't know who is who and we don't why. So, I am not drawn in, I can't care if I don't know what or why something is happening. It is mayhem, without reason.
The screeching title song is the worst ever and the title sequence unmemorable.
The opening scene with Mr White starts out fine. I like the Mr White character, played very menacing by Jesper Christianson. But the scene breaks down with the double cross and shooting. I swore M was shot, but I quess not. The chase that ensues once again leaves me cold, because much of the time I do not know who is who. However, I will say that at times Forster's use of the hand cam during the chase does give the viewer a feel for the action. So it has its place, my complaint is it should have been offset by longshots to give the audience some perspective.
The boat chase is another poor action scene hurt once again by poor editing and poor camera position IMO. I still have no idea how Bond dispatches the last boat. I see him grab the grappling hook, but have no idea what happened after that, and neither did my wife.
At this point the movie slows down and IMO improves. My favorite scene in the movie takes place at the opera with many Bondian moments. Taking the gift bag away from one of the bad guys, then breaking the door handle off the door as he leaves. Listening into the conversation and then breaking in with a clever remark. Those were nice Bond moments. Unfortunately it ends when we once again get Bond shooting the place up.
The relationship between Bond and Camille is very good. I felt Craig and Olga had way more chemistry then Craig and Green. Although I find Olga average looking when compared to some other Bond girls, I enjoyed her character and her performance Gemma Atherton on the other hand had an average performance to match her average looks and is mostly forgettable. Although I did enjoy how Bond decides to check into a better hotel with her, the line he gives the hotel clerk is another Bondian moment.
The villian, Dominic Green, is another forgettable character. Another poster on this site mentioned that Fleming would have been proud of this movie. Well I don't think he would have been proud of the villian. Fleming usually spent a chapter telling the villian's background from childhood through the rise to their criminal years. I knew nothing of Greene, didn't understand his motivation or his plot.
Mathis and Leiter both return and they work into the storyline well. I didn't like the selection of Wright when it was first made, and he was given little to do in CR, but I enjoyed his performance here.
I liked the Bolivian scenes, I got a real feel for the country. I would say the cinematography in QOS was top notch. Kudos to Roberto Schaefer for a beautiful looking film.
I feel I have to mention two scenes that I really did not like. The fall from the airplane with a chute opening just seemingly a few feet from the ground and Bond with Olga walking away, was a bit much. I assume it was supposed to ne a homage to Goldfinger, but Fields being covered in oil on the bed, laid out like Jill Masterson, annoyed me, it seemed out of place.
I should mention that I liked the score and I liked Craig's performance. I will never think he looks like Bond, but he does give a good performance. I believe he earns his paycheck.
So where do I think QOS ranks. With all Bond movies, as I watch them over they tend to move up or down my scale. CR I enjoyed at first viewing, but it has slipped in subsequent viewings. I think QOS will be in the bottom half. Their are some very good moments, but the lack of a comprehensible plot and the poor action scenes leave it lacking.
Random notes
I saw the movie in a 220 seat theater, it was slightly less then half full with a rather old crowd. The majority were 50 or older. Twilight was playing next door and it was jammed with every teenage girl within a 50 mile radius.
I hate the gun barrel at the end.
I saw the trailer for, and am looking forward to seeing The Day the Earth Stood Still.
At times I still have trouble understandinmg Craig.
I find it odd that the Bond movies of the 60's were sexier than the Bond movies of this era.
Why do I alwaus buy the big bag of popcorn, when I always feel sick about half way through consuming it. 8-)
I saw the movie in a 220 seat theater, it was slightly less then half full with a rather old crowd. The majority were 50 or older. Twilight was playing next door and it was jammed with every teenage girl within a 50 mile radius.
This is too funny Barry. I saw it last week and had almost the same exact audience experience! Not only was Twilight getting all the attention, there was a camera crew outside interviewing the crowds of squealing 15 year old girls about how much they LOVEDDDD the movie. Yeesh. James Bond is on the screen next door, and all they care about is vampires. ) A couple of the 60 somethings in my audience were none too pleased about QOS as I could tell. Two of the men left half way through, and the older woman in front of me just shook her head when the credits rolled. It depressed me a little actually. I'm much younger than them, and if I feel the formula has been tweaked a little too much, how must they feel? They were the ones that were seeing Goldfinger in the theaters back in the day after all. I consider myself to be a pretty intelligent Bond fan, and I was completely confused what just happened several times. The truth be told, if I hadn't spoiled so much by reading the reviews beforehand, I would have been totally lost throughout the movie! If several little gems hadn't been pointed out, I might have missed them totally! It was distracting and infuriating! If you hadn't seen CR at all, let alone dozens of times like most of us, or even recently, you would not have been able to follow much of it at all. That is not a good idea. I like the continuation, but Bond movies need to be stand alone films, and QOS is not that.
I didn't love QOS, but I didn't hate it. Like Barry I'm conflicted. It was dizzying at times, unbelievably fast paced, yet when there were moments that began to feel Bondian to me, they were immediately off on another tangent. The movie actually felt like I was watching it on fast forward on a DVD. And I still have questions! My husband said he felt like it was an incomplete film, a rushed copy that a test audience was viewing to gauge reactions on what scenes worked so far. I can see why, it certainly does have it's flaws.
Craig did a fine job with it, but I do have a really hard time understanding him sometimes! He's got that marbles in his mouth way of speaking that you miss some of his great lines! Does anyone else notice this? It drives me nuts.
I was so looking forward to the Opera scene I had read so much about! It was clever and I enjoyed it, but it was over too fast! And did he really need to kill everyone in his path? That is really one of the things that I don't like about this new gritty Bond. Killing cops? Really? Throwing Mathis into garbage? Really? I hated that beyond words. That was completely unnecessary and gave me an instant stomach ache. ( Or maybe it was all that popcorn Barry!) They could have just left it when he cradled him as he died...great emotion there..why did we need to know what he did with the body, and of all choices...that? Ugh. Tasteless in my opinion.
Another tasteless moment? The attempted rape scene. Cubby would freaking ROLL. Shame on Barbara and whoever else let that in. It's Bond, I don't want that much realism, thanks.
I was also surprised to hear the first actual "gonna get bleeped on tv" swear word in a Bond film coming from Dame Judi no less. I don't give a sh*t", I believe she said. I got a chuckle out of that.
I did love the Bond Girls, both of them quite appealing, and I may be the only one who thought the homage to Goldfinger, death by oil, was really ingenious. Except the camera angles were so bad, you didn't really know what you were seeing until it was long gone! There was a good shot at the end of the scene, but in my opinion it should have opened with that when Bond walked in. Where was their shock at this unthinkable act? None of them reacted at the sheer shock value of killing her that way! Note to Craig, watch Goldfinger again..right after the Beatles and earmuffs line. There ya go...that's the reaction to have.
I really liked the shot of Fields and Bond where he kisses her when she arches her back, that was a very sexy moment. Fleeting though, just as all the other moments I did like.
I also shamelessly LOVE the theme song. There I said it...I'm not proud, but I thought it sounded great in the theater.
One last gripe...why give a Bond Girl a clever cute name if you aren't going to use it at least ONCE in the movie? Just having it in the credits is lost on many people believe it or not. Even if she didn't tell him what it was, it could have been revealed somehow...on a file...a picture..
I also agree with so many of you about White being good and Greene being weak. I thought Judi Dench was wonderful as always, and Jeffrey Wright was good as well. Make up your mind how you want Felix portrayed though, he is never the same twice, that is for sure!
So I guess all in all it's good to have Bond back in theaters, even if Twilight is eclipsing it's importance a bit. I guess we'll see if QOS hurts or helps 23 as, we know CR definitely helped it!
Another tasteless moment? The attempted rape scene. Cubby would freaking ROLL. Shame on Barbara and whoever else let that in. It's Bond, I don't want that much realism, thanks.
While Cubby might indeed hate such a scene, it struck me as very Fleming. Glad the filmmakers went there (as brutal as it was), very much Bond to my mind.
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
edited April 2009
Quantum of Solace - A Review
James Bond sets on a mission to find out who is responsible for the death of his love in the sequel to Casino Royale. Daniel Craig reprises his role as the British agent and has a more accomplished role than in his previous outing. The character was very quiet and subtle but here he is more open and upfront. This is the finest point of the film as the character is developing and viewers get to see the darker side of the hero and as this is a predecessor to all other Bonds, it shapes the character in exactly the right way. The heart of the film is Bond's emotional journey as he comes to terms with the death of Vesper and therefore it feels less consequential than other Bond films where Bond is a key player in a wide reaching plan and plot. Action sequences are shot in a similar way to 'Paul Greengrass's' 'Bourne' films, and the comparisons are inevitable. They do work though, and are well conceived and shot. 'Daniel Craig' delivers a solid performance again, as in 'Casino Royale' this is his film; he is a primeval force that pushes the film forward. This is of course personal taste.
Kurylenko is a fantastic Bond girl. She looks the part, worn down by her past and carrying her own agenda. She is dark, feisty and mysterious, a great combination and has some great onscreen moments with Bond, just watch out for a great boat chase. The concept of the series has changed too. There is no gigantic laser orbiting in space or evil megalomaniac genius watching the world burn from his stronghold. The evil comes slowly and in this movie, it's just the tip of then iceberg. A networking evil, impersonated by people who are dangerous because they're intelligent, ruthless and not alone. Future instalments will almost certainly reveal more of this.
Picking up almost immediately from where Casino Royale left off, Bond has captured Mr. White (Jesper Christiansen) and brought him in for questioning by Bond's superior, M (Judi Dench, once again). What Bond and M quickly discover is that the organization that White works for, known as Quantum, has far ranging influence and are using their powers to topple governments in order to gain a foothold wherever they deem financial lucrative for them. Bond follows clues that lead him to Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a key player in Quantum, who is helping to destabilize the government of Boliva in order to install a dictator, General Medrano (Joaquin Cosio), to allow them to control a valuable natural resource. Accompanying Bond on his mission is Camille (Olga Kurylenko), who has a personal score to settle with Medrano, while Bond is also set on revenge for the death of his love from Casino Royale, Vesper Lynd.
Bond fans will be pleased with the action sequences as Casino Royale lacked in that area. Here we have cars, planes, boats and on foot chases all generating that action styled feeling that the Bond franchise does so well. However the early action sequences, specifically the opening car chase scene, is poorly directed. The fast montage does not do the car chase any justice. There are 1 second shots showing brief glimpses of vehicles and characters and is never effectively established. The feeling is there, but without a clear cut picture it is hard to get a proper view of the sequence. The producers have taken a big risk with this film. More casual viewers who sit back with a bucket of popcorn and expect to be entertained while switching off their brains will not be pleased. The film expects you to understand Casino Royale and for you to engage. It's smart and rewarding but very, very, different.
.... More casual viewers who sit back with a bucket of popcorn and expect to be entertained while switching off their brains will not be pleased. The film expects you to understand Casino Royale and for you to engage.
:v nice clichees, Sweepy. Isn't that a bit too easy and insulting to those who actually didn't enjoy QoS as much as you did?
And I think, that I did read exactly this line already somewhere else.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I saw the movie in a 220 seat theater, it was slightly less then half full with a rather old crowd. The majority were 50 or older. Twilight was playing next door and it was jammed with every teenage girl within a 50 mile radius.
It was dizzying at times, unbelievably fast paced, yet when there were moments that began to feel Bondian to me, they were immediately off on another tangent. Craig did a fine job with it, but I do have a really hard time understanding him sometimes! He's got that marbles in his mouth way of speaking that you miss some of his great lines! Does anyone else notice this? It drives me nuts.
And did he really need to kill everyone in his path? That is really one of the things that I don't like about this new gritty Bond. Killing cops? Really? Throwing Mathis into garbage? Really? I hated that beyond words. That was completely unnecessary and gave me an instant stomach ache. ( Or maybe it was all that popcorn Barry!) They could have just left it when he cradled him as he died...great emotion there..why did we need to know what he did with the body, and of all choices...that? Ugh. Tasteless in my opinion.
Jeffrey Wright was good as well. Make up your mind how you want Felix portrayed though, he is never the same twice, that is for sure!
I agree with all your points above Mo. Just when the movie started to get a Bond feel, it quickly throws in a confusing action scene, the opera house being the best example. As you said, did he really need to start shooting everyone. And yes, I do have trouble understanding Craig at times.
I also was surprised by the disposal of Mathis's body, don't understand the purpose of the act.
Good point about Wright, his portrayal of Leiter in this movie was different than CR.
I am still replaying the film in my head and I think if you add some scenes to help establish (tell) the plot, and edit down a couple of the other scenes, you might have a good movie.
Note to Sweepy - Didn't you already post that review, seems very familiar.
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
While Cubby might indeed hate such a scene, it struck me as very Fleming. Glad the filmmakers went there (as brutal as it was), very much Bond to my mind.
You've got some pretty dark corners in that mind blue, because I couldn't disagree more. That is NOT Bond. Rape has no place in a Bond film. Saying everything brutal is Fleming-esque is justification in my opinion.
Mo, I would never in a million years argue with you, but have you read The Spy Who Loved Me? That's the book where Fleming notoriously writes that all women love "semi-rape" (cringe), and where Bond enters the scene just as the heroine is about to be raped and murdered by the bad guys. The Fleming novels are filled with allusions to rape and some of his heroines--Tiffany Case, Honeychile Rider, Pussy Galore--have pasts punctuated by sexual abuse and rape. Tasteless as the "crotch shot" in the QoS near-rape scene was--and as unpleasant as the entire situation may have been--a case can be made for the sequence being Flemingesque.
Mo, I would never in a million years argue with you, but have you read The Spy Who Loved Me? That's the book where Fleming notoriously writes that all women love "semi-rape" (cringe), and where Bond enters the scene just as the heroine is about to be raped and murdered by the bad guys. The Fleming novels are filled with allusions to rape and some of his heroines--Tiffany Case, Honeychile Rider, Pussy Galore--have pasts punctuated by sexual abuse and rape. Tasteless as the "crotch shot" in the QoS near-rape scene was--and as unpleasant as the entire situation may have been--a case can be made for the sequence being Flemingesque.
Spot on!!
I too thought the rape scene was the closest thing to the novels.
Maybe Monique hasn't actually read the Fleming books.....:v
I still don't want to see it, and found it completely unnecessary. There has never been the actual act before, even if it was implied or hinted at in a past or whatever, you didn't see it...it's never been as bad as it is in QOS.
And no I haven't read all of the Fleming novels, I've only read about 5 of them. Does that disqualify my opinion? I am talking about BOND FILMS here....which are quite different....ok?
I guess I have to qualify as a FEMALE I found it painful to watch. Good to know so many of you enjoyed it.
Monique, my opinion of Bond is first framed by what Fleming wrote, second by what EON has filmed. Fleming was a sadistic a-hole who thought women should come (to use the Bogart quote from "Dead Reckoning") "pocket-size" - whip them out when needed, stuff them back in when not. I'm sometimes amazed that he managed to give his female characters the depth he did, writing from such a deep dark closet. Won't speak for anybody else, but yeah all that blood and guts stuff can, when handled right, work for me in the context of the hero is only as good as the villain is bad. And you're exactly right - EON has sugar-coated much of their Fleming, so much so that I don't even think of many of the films as Bond, just too G-rated. Neutered him. I realize for some, that's the Bond they expect and want to see every film. And I'n actually shocked EON strayed so far from their template with QOS, it's the darkest Bond yet IMO, and the Bond film that comes closest in feeling to what and how Fleming wrote. IMHO. So makes my day even if some parts are necessarily grim. Not geeking on women suffering, just that - like Fleming - the filmmakers have decided to depict some very harrowing stuff in telling their, for me and others, very Bondian story. That's what I think the polarization is all about, the editing was just a tool used to capture what the filmmakers were after; the shifted sensibility is the raw nerve that tool is tweaking.
Someone in another thread pointed out how similar QOS and MR the novel were, in tone and even some plot points, and I definitely agree with that. So while Babs and Mikey may be turning down a different road than Cubby (Mr. Family Entertainment) ever wanted to travel with Bond, they do seem to have their feet squarely in Fleming's bloody footprints. For better or worse, and at the risk of turning off some fans.
And that's where we're at. But as Loeff says, that other more cinematic (and less graphic) Bond will undoubtedly return at some point, just have to wait it out. Anyway, hope that helps, and I really don't think anyone has said they enjoyed that particular scene of rape, just that it was very Fleming and suited to such a Bond film. For me, I was glad to see a female character given such depth in a Bond film - and not just backstory, but actual screen time given to Camille to get her to her story's conclusion. Not a pretty Fleming heroine, but tragic and amazing IMO.
Some of you might be bemused by the absence of the grand nitpicker of them all, moi.
But it seems Alessandra has taken over my role!
I don't mind so much what QoS was trying to do. It just didn't work from almost go. I mean, it's all in my extended review way back but... I mean, Bond chasing Mitchell, leaving M alone in the hands of the cackling demonic Mr White. The head of MI6 ye gads... And then it picks up after in M's apartment, no mention except White escaped. I can't really take a film seriously when it does that, so there you go. Certainly can't bang on about much, for which I know some will be grateful.
We were moaning that Haggis should have got his script in for, what was it, the one million dollars he was paid, before the writers strike but we all made light of it at the time. What a dog's breakfast.
Well I have read every Fleming novel, multiple times, and I agree with Mo, the scene was gratuitous. We know the general is a bad guy, he has killed Camille's family and "did things" to her mother and older sister, which Camille was forced to watch. I don't think the audience needs the idea that the general is a bad guy reinforced. Even if the writers felt the general needed to be involved in something when Camille breaks in, it could have been done less heavy handed. Perhaps, the general comes on to the woman in a strong manner suggesting he has bad intentions and then Camille breaks in. What ended up on the screen was unneccesary.
You know once upon time Bond films were fun, you left the cinema with a smile on your face. I didn't see anyone smiling when they left QOS.
I was smiling, though not necessarily cuz I had fun: I had just watched Bond as I'd never thought to see him, and that did make me smile.
And, I was very glad that Medrano had such a scene, usually the second-banana bad guys are way too thinly drawn (sometimes even the first-bananas), his raw brutality paired well with Greene's snaky nastiness IMO, made a great villainous duo. {[]
Well I have read every Fleming novel, multiple times, and I agree with Mo, the scene was gratuitous.(
Count me in on that too. I'm amazed that the BBFC let this film through as a 12A (while LTK, which is a walk in the park by comparison, is still a 15-rated DVD). My brother was horrified by the level of violence, and in particular the attempted rape scene, when he took his 11 year old son. I also discouraged a friend of mine who wanted to take her 7 year old because "he loves Bond".
While I agree that the scene was completely unnecessary, if it had to be there it should have rated this film a 15 or came with some form of warning. Kids have grown up with Bond on public holidays, it's almost a passage of rite for most British kids, but this is no family film. Fleming or no Fleming, it left a nasty taste in my mouth.
leaving M alone in the hands of the cackling demonic Mr White. The head of MI6 ye gads... And then it picks up after in M's apartment, no mention except White escaped.
Ah, but M vanished. Whether she dived out the window or used some of that Die Another Day technology by donning an invisibilty cloak, I dunno; if it was explained it was a "blink and you'll miss it" scene, like much of the film.
Oh, right.... Thing is, I can quite love nasty films. Face/Off had its decadent moments, also Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill Vol 1. With QoS it was tasteless, ie, the villains haven't done anything too nasty yet, the audience prob don't care about the water hoarding, let's throw in a bit of rape instead to get the audience hating the villain. Subtle. And again, tastless it you've recently seen some naff free fall right into the villains Scooby-Doo style hideout, too.
Camille's revenge story looms pretty large in this film, setting up her backstory - what Medrano did to her family - then not going where they did with it would indeed be par for Cubby's Bond.
And good God, Cubby's Bond at his fluffiest is a terrible role-model for young boys! Talk about an uber-sexist using women like toilet tissue.
Throwing Mathis into garbage? Really? I hated that beyond words. That was completely unnecessary and gave me an instant stomach ache. ( Or maybe it was all that popcorn Barry!) They could have just left it when he cradled him as he died...great emotion there..why did we need to know what he did with the body, and of all choices...that? Ugh. Tasteless in my opinion.
Agreed.100%. This scene really annoyed me. Why did Bond have to put his friend in a skip? You had the build up of the relationship,the poignant death and then that.Totally unnecessary IMO.
I've actually calmed down alot from my original 'from the gut' review and I'm viewing the film a lot more objectively.I may even go and see it again to reassess.
Well I have read every Fleming novel, multiple times, and I agree with Mo, the scene was gratuitous.(
Count me in on that too. I'm amazed that the BBFC let this film through as a 12A (while LTK, which is a walk in the park by comparison, is still a 15-rated DVD). My brother was horrified by the level of violence, and in particular the attempted rape scene, when he took his 11 year old son. I also discouraged a friend of mine who wanted to take her 7 year old because "he loves Bond".
While I agree that the scene was completely unnecessary, if it had to be there it should have rated this film a 15 or came with some form of warning. Kids have grown up with Bond on public holidays, it's almost a passage of rite for most British kids, but this is no family film. Fleming or no Fleming, it left a nasty taste in my mouth.
I was just talking about the gratuitous violence elsewhere, and I completely agree the scene in question was unnecessary. I can't see, as you and Monique said, how it made the character any more rounded. That he was the baddie was established before so there wasn't any need for that in my opinion.
We were also discussing about someone bringing like a 3-year-old child to see the movie?! :O I am not sure what rating it got here, in general when they're particularly violent though I think they get a 14, which means people under 14 can't go watch the movie. I will need to check I'm really not sure. That's pretty much all we have. Either 14 or 18, nothing in between.
We don't have PG12 etc, so I'm curious to see if it didn't have any sort of restriction. I'd be shocked frankly, given the general violence of the movie, but sometimes these things are just handled in a strange way (as with the LTK DVD, just :O, it really is mild family entertainment compared to QoS).
The key to me is what Barry was mentioning. It's Bond, I expect to walk out of the cinema with a smile after having been entertained, not feeling dizzy for shaky camera and disgusted by the gratuitous violence. I did enjoy LTK, even though it was darker than most Bond movies, but it really is Cinderella compared to QoS, at least as far as my feelings at the end of the movie are concerned )
Then of course, at least blue DID walk out with a smile, so that makes one more increasing that percentage
But it seems Alessandra has taken over my role.
Oh no, I never, ever could NP. Also because there are, ahem, basic biological differences between us? )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited November 2008
About Mathis' death, and the disposal of his body: I thought it was poignant, and spot-on. Bond's remark that his friend "wouldn't care," the jarringly field-expedient utility of removing the cash from the wallet, the way the camera lingers on the dumpster from above---it all elicits revulsion, which it is intended to do, and belies the grief so brilliantly underplayed by Daniel Craig, but it also speaks to the compartmentalization required by someone in Bond's line of work in order to avoid going insane.
Of course the attempted rape scene is distasteful, but I'd disagree that it was unnecessary. It is who Medrano is---which is what made Camille who she is---therefore IMO it's a key bit of character business in a film decried for having none. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that the act is interrupted takes quite a bit of the curse off it...and having Camille be the one to do the interrupting was rather poetic in its symmetry.
I was much more disturbed, at the time, by Sanchez' beating of Lupe in LTK.
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
Comments
Usually with a film you think about it for a review and a load of things spring to mind. With QOS I could barely remember half the film five minutes after walking out of the cinema. The lack of a gunbarrel in its proper place & the absence of the Bond theme isn't a great help and the title sequence is rubbish. Jack White's song is, in my opinion, the worst in the series by a considerable distance.
As someone who complained about the lack of a car chase in CR, I was pleased to see one hyped up for QOS. The end result though is not unlike much of QOS; loud and incomprehensible. It's obviously an attempt to top the chase at the end of the second Bourne film but bungled by a twitchy editing style. This process is repeated several times in the film with the footchase being a case in point. The editing made it difficult (for me anyway) to follow and it eventually falls apart completely with a CGI Daniel Craig crashing through a glass ceiling and dangling around on a load of ropes like Spider-Man.
The influence of Jason Bourne is very apparent in the film with three or four scenes lifted straight out of that rival spy series. It also has a comical Moonraker type scene with Daniel Craig falling out of an aeroplane in CGI and then dusting himself off on the ground without a mark and a pointless nod to Goldfinger with the lovely Gemma covered in oil. There are bits and pieces that reminded me of moments in other Bond films like TMWTGG (climax) and TSWLM (desert, throwing that bloke off a roof). I was suprised that Gemma, after all the publicity, got about three scenes and might as well have introduced herself as Felicity Bigknockers or something. She deserved a better character (and hairstyle) and proved in Tess of the D'Urbervilles she is a promising actress. Also, why would M send her to bring in this superhuman Bond? The weird random shots of the Palio horse race sum up the scattergun approach and rushed feeling to the film. It endlessly piles on the action and as I never really cared about Bond's quest or even had much idea of what was going on half the time I struggled to stay connected as Daniel Craig killed about 37 thousand people.
Strangely, I didn't mind Judi Dench too much in this one and Jeffrey Wright is competent in his brief bits as Felix. Mathieu Amalric was not much of a baddie and I never really cared what he was up to but Olga Kurylenko does ok as Camille and throws herself into the mayhem. The film looks quite sleek in places and it's a shame that these flourishes couldn't have been infused into a more coherent and substantial Bond film. There are also a tad too many pretentious touches for my tastes like the poncy fonts to indicate locations and the slo-mo opera shoot-out.
We all have our own tastes and preferences when it comes to James Bond but for me this new era just lacks charm and fun.
er...I did say serious therapy...
I loved the opera scene, but this was the one part that felt over-the-top and almost took me out of the movie. It would have been better to apply this excess of style to the many other parts of the movie which were severely lacking in it.
After all, this is what differentiates James Bond from the legions of graceless grunts who feature in 90% of action movies. I'm all for grit and realism, but if it's not done with class it's not quite Bond --QoS went too far in the former direction and ended up with the curious mixture of class and crass that we are all complaining about.
I agree...I felt the opera scene was not well done at all. Maybe it was the slo-mo (which I've come to despise in almost all forms), but it seemed like I was watching a perfume commercial. I would have been mesmerized if there was adequate story and plot to frame the drama of the moment.
The opening PTS is dreadful, quick cuts of crashing cars and trucks, clutches and gear shifts, but we don't know who is who and we don't why. So, I am not drawn in, I can't care if I don't know what or why something is happening. It is mayhem, without reason.
The screeching title song is the worst ever and the title sequence unmemorable.
The opening scene with Mr White starts out fine. I like the Mr White character, played very menacing by Jesper Christianson. But the scene breaks down with the double cross and shooting. I swore M was shot, but I quess not. The chase that ensues once again leaves me cold, because much of the time I do not know who is who. However, I will say that at times Forster's use of the hand cam during the chase does give the viewer a feel for the action. So it has its place, my complaint is it should have been offset by longshots to give the audience some perspective.
The boat chase is another poor action scene hurt once again by poor editing and poor camera position IMO. I still have no idea how Bond dispatches the last boat. I see him grab the grappling hook, but have no idea what happened after that, and neither did my wife.
At this point the movie slows down and IMO improves. My favorite scene in the movie takes place at the opera with many Bondian moments. Taking the gift bag away from one of the bad guys, then breaking the door handle off the door as he leaves. Listening into the conversation and then breaking in with a clever remark. Those were nice Bond moments. Unfortunately it ends when we once again get Bond shooting the place up.
The relationship between Bond and Camille is very good. I felt Craig and Olga had way more chemistry then Craig and Green. Although I find Olga average looking when compared to some other Bond girls, I enjoyed her character and her performance Gemma Atherton on the other hand had an average performance to match her average looks and is mostly forgettable. Although I did enjoy how Bond decides to check into a better hotel with her, the line he gives the hotel clerk is another Bondian moment.
The villian, Dominic Green, is another forgettable character. Another poster on this site mentioned that Fleming would have been proud of this movie. Well I don't think he would have been proud of the villian. Fleming usually spent a chapter telling the villian's background from childhood through the rise to their criminal years. I knew nothing of Greene, didn't understand his motivation or his plot.
Mathis and Leiter both return and they work into the storyline well. I didn't like the selection of Wright when it was first made, and he was given little to do in CR, but I enjoyed his performance here.
I liked the Bolivian scenes, I got a real feel for the country. I would say the cinematography in QOS was top notch. Kudos to Roberto Schaefer for a beautiful looking film.
I feel I have to mention two scenes that I really did not like. The fall from the airplane with a chute opening just seemingly a few feet from the ground and Bond with Olga walking away, was a bit much. I assume it was supposed to ne a homage to Goldfinger, but Fields being covered in oil on the bed, laid out like Jill Masterson, annoyed me, it seemed out of place.
I should mention that I liked the score and I liked Craig's performance. I will never think he looks like Bond, but he does give a good performance. I believe he earns his paycheck.
So where do I think QOS ranks. With all Bond movies, as I watch them over they tend to move up or down my scale. CR I enjoyed at first viewing, but it has slipped in subsequent viewings. I think QOS will be in the bottom half. Their are some very good moments, but the lack of a comprehensible plot and the poor action scenes leave it lacking.
Random notes
I saw the movie in a 220 seat theater, it was slightly less then half full with a rather old crowd. The majority were 50 or older. Twilight was playing next door and it was jammed with every teenage girl within a 50 mile radius.
I hate the gun barrel at the end.
I saw the trailer for, and am looking forward to seeing The Day the Earth Stood Still.
At times I still have trouble understandinmg Craig.
I find it odd that the Bond movies of the 60's were sexier than the Bond movies of this era.
Why do I alwaus buy the big bag of popcorn, when I always feel sick about half way through consuming it. 8-)
This is too funny Barry. I saw it last week and had almost the same exact audience experience! Not only was Twilight getting all the attention, there was a camera crew outside interviewing the crowds of squealing 15 year old girls about how much they LOVEDDDD the movie. Yeesh. James Bond is on the screen next door, and all they care about is vampires.
I didn't love QOS, but I didn't hate it. Like Barry I'm conflicted. It was dizzying at times, unbelievably fast paced, yet when there were moments that began to feel Bondian to me, they were immediately off on another tangent. The movie actually felt like I was watching it on fast forward on a DVD. And I still have questions! My husband said he felt like it was an incomplete film, a rushed copy that a test audience was viewing to gauge reactions on what scenes worked so far. I can see why, it certainly does have it's flaws.
Craig did a fine job with it, but I do have a really hard time understanding him sometimes! He's got that marbles in his mouth way of speaking that you miss some of his great lines! Does anyone else notice this? It drives me nuts.
I was so looking forward to the Opera scene I had read so much about! It was clever and I enjoyed it, but it was over too fast! And did he really need to kill everyone in his path? That is really one of the things that I don't like about this new gritty Bond. Killing cops? Really? Throwing Mathis into garbage? Really? I hated that beyond words. That was completely unnecessary and gave me an instant stomach ache. ( Or maybe it was all that popcorn Barry!) They could have just left it when he cradled him as he died...great emotion there..why did we need to know what he did with the body, and of all choices...that? Ugh. Tasteless in my opinion.
Another tasteless moment? The attempted rape scene. Cubby would freaking ROLL. Shame on Barbara and whoever else let that in. It's Bond, I don't want that much realism, thanks.
I was also surprised to hear the first actual "gonna get bleeped on tv" swear word in a Bond film coming from Dame Judi no less. I don't give a sh*t", I believe she said. I got a chuckle out of that.
I did love the Bond Girls, both of them quite appealing, and I may be the only one who thought the homage to Goldfinger, death by oil, was really ingenious. Except the camera angles were so bad, you didn't really know what you were seeing until it was long gone! There was a good shot at the end of the scene, but in my opinion it should have opened with that when Bond walked in. Where was their shock at this unthinkable act? None of them reacted at the sheer shock value of killing her that way! Note to Craig, watch Goldfinger again..right after the Beatles and earmuffs line. There ya go...that's the reaction to have.
I really liked the shot of Fields and Bond where he kisses her when she arches her back, that was a very sexy moment. Fleeting though, just as all the other moments I did like.
I also shamelessly LOVE the theme song. There I said it...I'm not proud, but I thought it sounded great in the theater.
One last gripe...why give a Bond Girl a clever cute name if you aren't going to use it at least ONCE in the movie? Just having it in the credits is lost on many people believe it or not. Even if she didn't tell him what it was, it could have been revealed somehow...on a file...a picture..
I also agree with so many of you about White being good and Greene being weak. I thought Judi Dench was wonderful as always, and Jeffrey Wright was good as well. Make up your mind how you want Felix portrayed though, he is never the same twice, that is for sure!
So I guess all in all it's good to have Bond back in theaters, even if Twilight is eclipsing it's importance a bit. I guess we'll see if QOS hurts or helps 23 as, we know CR definitely helped it!
James Bond sets on a mission to find out who is responsible for the death of his love in the sequel to Casino Royale. Daniel Craig reprises his role as the British agent and has a more accomplished role than in his previous outing. The character was very quiet and subtle but here he is more open and upfront. This is the finest point of the film as the character is developing and viewers get to see the darker side of the hero and as this is a predecessor to all other Bonds, it shapes the character in exactly the right way. The heart of the film is Bond's emotional journey as he comes to terms with the death of Vesper and therefore it feels less consequential than other Bond films where Bond is a key player in a wide reaching plan and plot. Action sequences are shot in a similar way to 'Paul Greengrass's' 'Bourne' films, and the comparisons are inevitable. They do work though, and are well conceived and shot. 'Daniel Craig' delivers a solid performance again, as in 'Casino Royale' this is his film; he is a primeval force that pushes the film forward. This is of course personal taste.
Kurylenko is a fantastic Bond girl. She looks the part, worn down by her past and carrying her own agenda. She is dark, feisty and mysterious, a great combination and has some great onscreen moments with Bond, just watch out for a great boat chase. The concept of the series has changed too. There is no gigantic laser orbiting in space or evil megalomaniac genius watching the world burn from his stronghold. The evil comes slowly and in this movie, it's just the tip of then iceberg. A networking evil, impersonated by people who are dangerous because they're intelligent, ruthless and not alone. Future instalments will almost certainly reveal more of this.
Picking up almost immediately from where Casino Royale left off, Bond has captured Mr. White (Jesper Christiansen) and brought him in for questioning by Bond's superior, M (Judi Dench, once again). What Bond and M quickly discover is that the organization that White works for, known as Quantum, has far ranging influence and are using their powers to topple governments in order to gain a foothold wherever they deem financial lucrative for them. Bond follows clues that lead him to Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a key player in Quantum, who is helping to destabilize the government of Boliva in order to install a dictator, General Medrano (Joaquin Cosio), to allow them to control a valuable natural resource. Accompanying Bond on his mission is Camille (Olga Kurylenko), who has a personal score to settle with Medrano, while Bond is also set on revenge for the death of his love from Casino Royale, Vesper Lynd.
Bond fans will be pleased with the action sequences as Casino Royale lacked in that area. Here we have cars, planes, boats and on foot chases all generating that action styled feeling that the Bond franchise does so well. However the early action sequences, specifically the opening car chase scene, is poorly directed. The fast montage does not do the car chase any justice. There are 1 second shots showing brief glimpses of vehicles and characters and is never effectively established. The feeling is there, but without a clear cut picture it is hard to get a proper view of the sequence. The producers have taken a big risk with this film. More casual viewers who sit back with a bucket of popcorn and expect to be entertained while switching off their brains will not be pleased. The film expects you to understand Casino Royale and for you to engage. It's smart and rewarding but very, very, different.
9/10
:v nice clichees, Sweepy. Isn't that a bit too easy and insulting to those who actually didn't enjoy QoS as much as you did?
And I think, that I did read exactly this line already somewhere else.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I agree with all your points above Mo. Just when the movie started to get a Bond feel, it quickly throws in a confusing action scene, the opera house being the best example. As you said, did he really need to start shooting everyone. And yes, I do have trouble understanding Craig at times.
I also was surprised by the disposal of Mathis's body, don't understand the purpose of the act.
Good point about Wright, his portrayal of Leiter in this movie was different than CR.
I am still replaying the film in my head and I think if you add some scenes to help establish (tell) the plot, and edit down a couple of the other scenes, you might have a good movie.
Note to Sweepy - Didn't you already post that review, seems very familiar.
There is one at the top of page 2 & page 15
You've got some pretty dark corners in that mind blue, because I couldn't disagree more. That is NOT Bond. Rape has no place in a Bond film. Saying everything brutal is Fleming-esque is justification in my opinion.
Spot on!!
I too thought the rape scene was the closest thing to the novels.
Maybe Monique hasn't actually read the Fleming books.....:v
And no I haven't read all of the Fleming novels, I've only read about 5 of them. Does that disqualify my opinion? I am talking about BOND FILMS here....which are quite different....ok?
I guess I have to qualify as a FEMALE I found it painful to watch. Good to know so many of you enjoyed it.
Someone in another thread pointed out how similar QOS and MR the novel were, in tone and even some plot points, and I definitely agree with that. So while Babs and Mikey may be turning down a different road than Cubby (Mr. Family Entertainment) ever wanted to travel with Bond, they do seem to have their feet squarely in Fleming's bloody footprints. For better or worse, and at the risk of turning off some fans.
And that's where we're at. But as Loeff says, that other more cinematic (and less graphic) Bond will undoubtedly return at some point, just have to wait it out. Anyway, hope that helps, and I really don't think anyone has said they enjoyed that particular scene of rape, just that it was very Fleming and suited to such a Bond film. For me, I was glad to see a female character given such depth in a Bond film - and not just backstory, but actual screen time given to Camille to get her to her story's conclusion. Not a pretty Fleming heroine, but tragic and amazing IMO.
But it seems Alessandra has taken over my role!
I don't mind so much what QoS was trying to do. It just didn't work from almost go. I mean, it's all in my extended review way back but... I mean, Bond chasing Mitchell, leaving M alone in the hands of the cackling demonic Mr White. The head of MI6 ye gads... And then it picks up after in M's apartment, no mention except White escaped. I can't really take a film seriously when it does that, so there you go. Certainly can't bang on about much, for which I know some will be grateful.
We were moaning that Haggis should have got his script in for, what was it, the one million dollars he was paid, before the writers strike but we all made light of it at the time. What a dog's breakfast.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
You know once upon time Bond films were fun, you left the cinema with a smile on your face. I didn't see anyone smiling when they left QOS.
And, I was very glad that Medrano had such a scene, usually the second-banana bad guys are way too thinly drawn (sometimes even the first-bananas), his raw brutality paired well with Greene's snaky nastiness IMO, made a great villainous duo. {[]
While I agree that the scene was completely unnecessary, if it had to be there it should have rated this film a 15 or came with some form of warning. Kids have grown up with Bond on public holidays, it's almost a passage of rite for most British kids, but this is no family film. Fleming or no Fleming, it left a nasty taste in my mouth.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
And good God, Cubby's Bond at his fluffiest is a terrible role-model for young boys! Talk about an uber-sexist using women like toilet tissue.
Fleming did have a really odd side to him, the Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang still scares the hell out of me!
Agreed.100%. This scene really annoyed me. Why did Bond have to put his friend in a skip? You had the build up of the relationship,the poignant death and then that.Totally unnecessary IMO.
I've actually calmed down alot from my original 'from the gut' review and I'm viewing the film a lot more objectively.I may even go and see it again to reassess.
Ironically his best villain IMO.
I was just talking about the gratuitous violence elsewhere, and I completely agree the scene in question was unnecessary. I can't see, as you and Monique said, how it made the character any more rounded. That he was the baddie was established before so there wasn't any need for that in my opinion.
We were also discussing about someone bringing like a 3-year-old child to see the movie?! :O I am not sure what rating it got here, in general when they're particularly violent though I think they get a 14, which means people under 14 can't go watch the movie. I will need to check I'm really not sure. That's pretty much all we have. Either 14 or 18, nothing in between.
We don't have PG12 etc, so I'm curious to see if it didn't have any sort of restriction. I'd be shocked frankly, given the general violence of the movie, but sometimes these things are just handled in a strange way (as with the LTK DVD, just :O, it really is mild family entertainment compared to QoS).
The key to me is what Barry was mentioning. It's Bond, I expect to walk out of the cinema with a smile after having been entertained, not feeling dizzy for shaky camera and disgusted by the gratuitous violence. I did enjoy LTK, even though it was darker than most Bond movies, but it really is Cinderella compared to QoS, at least as far as my feelings at the end of the movie are concerned
Then of course, at least blue DID walk out with a smile, so that makes one more increasing that percentage
Oh no, I never, ever could NP. Also because there are, ahem, basic biological differences between us?
Of course the attempted rape scene is distasteful, but I'd disagree that it was unnecessary. It is who Medrano is---which is what made Camille who she is---therefore IMO it's a key bit of character business in a film decried for having none. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that the act is interrupted takes quite a bit of the curse off it...and having Camille be the one to do the interrupting was rather poetic in its symmetry.
I was much more disturbed, at the time, by Sanchez' beating of Lupe in LTK.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM