QoS and Blink

Napoleon Plural

I recently reviewed Malcolm Gladwell's Blink on Last Books Read.

Like a cult member who only sees connections taking him back to his main interest, there are a number of relevent points.

Gladwell talks about how one psychology laboratory at the University of Washington can diagnose a relationship to see if its healthy. Thin-slicing, ie they can take a snippet of chat and see if it will work out between the couple. The main warning sign is if there is contempt by one to the other, apparently. This is of course, a key suggestion in Fleming's Quantum of Solace short story. (Though you could argue indifference was his main criteria).

Other factors pertaining to the film kick in later, in particular in a shoot to kill scenario where police officers are in a chase. Once their hearbeat goes past a certain level, they become 'austisic' - unable to respond to their quarry's expression and more likely to open fire. This may explain why Craig's Bond kills his victims at the end of a chase rather than seek to question them, it's all new to him and his heartbeat is so fast the finer nuances escape him.

Thirdly, it talks how fast action actually slows down when one is hyper alert. So the crash bang wallop of the opening would be just like that in real life, except the action man would be primed and pumped up to follow it.

So could it mean that those who were pumped up and on a rush to see QoS beforehand were better able to follow it than those more relaxed? I followed the Bourne stuff because I got pumped up with the storyline. Forster just dropped us right into it...

Loeffelholz

I haven't read the book or the author you cite, NP, but your insights are fascinating, and it sounds like a good read.

With regard to QoS, it's an interesting hypothesis. They've built a strong foundation for the future with this interpretation, IMRO, and I certainly hope the next film (however it unfolds) is more agreeable to fandom as a whole.

blueman

Really? I'm not sure that's possible anymore, too many different Bonds and types of Bond story-telling for any one approach to do it IMO.

Less edgy might ruffle fewer feathers, but that doesn't mean a better Bond film. IMHO the best Bonds push the envelop towards the nearest cliff-edge and jump, while the lesser ones sit comfy inside and wait to be mailed. Here's hoping EON jumps with the next one.

Loeffelholz

Nothing's impossible---especially the notion that #23 could be more agreeable to a majority of fandom than QoS, which was incredibly polarizing among hardcore Bond fans despite its undeniable (half a billion dollars plus) success. That's why I advocate a bit more of the 'fun factor'...but in careful and modest doses. That's why I find NP's observation about Bond's potential character evolution so interesting...when he manages to 'turn that corner,' it's going to be lightning in a bottle.

I like this Bond very much---he's my favourite at this point!---but there remains untapped potential, and I think Eon know this. It would be a shame if Craig, for all his talent, ends up remembered as a 'one note' Bond, and I simply don't think they will let this happen.