Re the editing- I do understand what the intention was. IMHO they fail in that intention. The prime exhibit for that statement is the scene of Mitchell's sudden turn and Mr White's escape. A first-time viewer which we all were initially comes away with the definite impression that M has been shot.
I NEVER got the impression that M had been shot - and was surprised when people on here thought that she had been (on initial viewing)
Is it possible (and I'm being serious) that you blinked at that exact moment, when M falls to the right? Or looked down at your popcorn?
Yeah I think I remember being confused as to whether she'd been hurt- having someone fall over after a gun is fired at them is pretty standard cinema shorthand for 'they've been shot'! There's just not enough information in the scene.
When M says later 'I passed him on the way in' it's sort of new information rather than anything you were allowed to notice at the time. I don't even remember getting a good idea of how many people are in the room, which makes White's 'person in the room' comment a bit of a cheat.
For me, QOS is a mess, especially the lunacy of the editing. The story is bland and it is the only Bond movie I have seen in that upon leaving the cinema I felt absolutely flat. After CR I had such high hopes and it was so disappointing to watch. Does anyone know why Martin Campbell didn’t direct what was essentially a direct sequel?
I used to rank the movies but it kept changing slightly every time I saw one, so I now categorise them as A, B, C or D.
QOS sits firmly in D along with GE, TWINE and DAD.
I guess he just didn't want to do it!
I agree with your D rating: I think it's a very good candidate for worst Bond film. Kind of bizarre it sits there sandwiched between two films I would suggest are right up there vying for the 'best Bond film ever' title. Craig really gets a rollercoaster ride! Let's hope that the downward plunge of Spectre means he's on his way back up with NTTD again!
I NEVER got the impression that M had been shot - and was surprised when people on here thought that she had been (on initial viewing)
Is it possible (and I'm being serious) that you blinked at that exact moment, when M falls to the right? Or looked down at your popcorn?
Yeah I think I remember being confused as to whether she'd been hurt- having someone fall over after a gun is fired at them is pretty standard cinema shorthand for 'they've been shot'! There's just not enough information in the scene.
When M says later 'I passed him on the way in' it's sort of new information rather than anything you were allowed to notice at the time. I don't even remember getting a good idea of how many people are in the room, which makes White's 'person in the room' comment a bit of a cheat.
Yes, we're not presented with enough information. The argument against that is that normally we (the audience) are spoonfed and it makes a change for us to have to work things out for ourselves. It's an argument with which I don't agree. Spoonfed or not, there are cinematic tropes that we have come to expect and it's jarring and disorienting to see them thrown away.
For me QoS has got better with time, especially when you consider how bad Spectre was. Dominic Greene was also a much better villain than Silva and Blofeld (Spectre) for me. Some of the light comedy was very good....teachers on sabbatical a good example. Bond's reaction after Mathis was killed was very well acted as was the scene in Kazan. Just show's that some of the best work doesn't need to be expensive. The chase scene was also very good. Funnily enough I rate the DC films in the order they were released with CR being far and away the best and Spectre one of the worst films I've ever seen. I think I'll watch QoS again very soon.
Is it possible (and I'm being serious) that you blinked at that exact moment, when M falls to the right? Or looked down at your popcorn?
Yeah I think I remember being confused as to whether she'd been hurt- having someone fall over after a gun is fired at them is pretty standard cinema shorthand for 'they've been shot'! There's just not enough information in the scene.
When M says later 'I passed him on the way in' it's sort of new information rather than anything you were allowed to notice at the time. I don't even remember getting a good idea of how many people are in the room, which makes White's 'person in the room' comment a bit of a cheat.
Yes, we're not presented with enough information. The argument against that is that normally we (the audience) are spoonfed and it makes a change for us to have to work things out for ourselves. It's an argument with which I don't agree. Spoonfed or not, there are cinematic tropes that we have come to expect and it's jarring and disorienting to see them thrown away.
I do hate it when people say 'spoonfed' or 'dumbed down' or anything like that as if giving you information is a bad thing.
I always find Chris McQuarrie's thoughts on filmmaking really interesting, and there's something he always points out which is that when he opens a scene he gives you the geography. For example in that amazing bathroom fight in Mission Impossible Fallout, he first has Ethan and Walker follow the bad guy around the room, and he says he does that so you know the layout of the room so you can follow the fight when it starts. And he's right: it's all very clear.
Or the Quantum guy in that room that we never see kind of reminded me of Silva's gang's approach to Skyfall lodge: you see them walking up to the house in a succession of shots, and in each shot the Aston Martin gets shown a little bit more. Now it's not quite the same thing as he's almost promising the audience that the car is about to do something, but he's giving you the information that it's there- it won't be a cheat when suddenly it starts machine gunning people. It's the difference between good filmmaking and poor filmmaking.
Question: is there a break in time after that initial chase scene in Italy, and Bond beginning the film's main mission in Latin America?
The film's pacing suggests it all happens continuously, and yet time is obviously moving much slower for Mathis once he reappears.
He's been tortured and then relocated to the island where Craig finds him, so presumably months have gone by for him.
I've decided in Casino Royale there is a time gap after Bond reports Vesper's death and Bond showing up at Mr White's house. It appears at first glance to be the very next thing he does, but there's no reason why that final scene should happen so quickly, and Bond at very least must have spent time researching to track him down. So time has gone by, even though the film does not tell us that.
Same at the end of Quantum..., the final scene could happen months after the Bolivia mission ends. So is there also a major time break near the beginning of the movie?
It's like the capturing of Mr White and the scenes in Sienna are their own selfcontained mission that straddles the beginning and end of two completely different films, without being actually part of either film's main story.
Oh I think there's definitely a gap between Venice and Mr White's house which could give us time for Mathis' recovery I guess. I can't remember if there's a gap between him going from London to America though: have his injuries from the Palio chase healed?
There's also an unspecified length of time needed for Bond to recover. Once Mathis is taken away, we're not told how long it is till Bond is mended enough to, ahem, provide Vesper with what she requires. (No, not the money)
There's also an unspecified length of time needed for Bond to recover. Once Mathis is taken away, we're not told how long it is till Bond is mended enough to, ahem, provide Vesper with what she requires. (No, not the money)
Yeah there's a certain amount of time at the clinic (don't we even see the seasons change?) and then they go away on their yacht together, which doesn't seem to be too long- they don't get out of Italy and M calls about the money and you can't believe she's left it for months and months, but long enough for Mathis to be interrogated and released.
That is one really weird choice in Casino Royale: why did they make it look like Mr White's house was right next door to where Bond had been convalescing? Shoot it anywhere else, surely?
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,920Chief of Staff
Re the editing- I do understand what the intention was. IMHO they fail in that intention. The prime exhibit for that statement is the scene of Mitchell's sudden turn and Mr White's escape. A first-time viewer which we all were initially comes away with the definite impression that M has been shot.
I NEVER got the impression that M had been shot - and was surprised when people on here thought that she had been (on initial viewing)
Is it possible (and I'm being serious) that you blinked at that exact moment, when M falls to the right? Or looked down at your popcorn?
I know I’m old but that would have to be one hell of a slow blink )
I don’t buy popcorn, I’m too tight to part with any more money after buying the ticket
I NEVER got the impression that M had been shot - and was surprised when people on here thought that she had been (on initial viewing)
Is it possible (and I'm being serious) that you blinked at that exact moment, when M falls to the right? Or looked down at your popcorn?
I know I’m old but that would have to be one hell of a slow blink )
I don’t buy popcorn, I’m too tight to part with any more money after buying the ticket
Just offering possibilities. How about this?
(Onscreen)
Mr White: ...and the truth is you don't even know we exist.
M: Well, we do now, Mr. White, and we're quick learners.
(Meanwhile, in the audience)
Attractive Companion: (Whispering) Sir Miles! Sir Miles!
Sir Miles: (Whispering) What is it?
Attractive Companion: (Whispering) Who is this Mr White?
Sir Miles: (Whispering) He was in the last movie, I'll explain later over drinks back at my place. Oh, look, James is chasing Mitchell.
...Your attention got diverted for about 0.003 seconds, which is how long most of the shots in any of the action scenes in this film last.
With this evening's viewing, is our starting point the fade of the Columbia Pictures logo? (I ask because Arnold's opening cue starts with that logo and plays over it, into the first shot.)
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
CR06 had a valid artistic reason for not having a normal gunbarrel. SF had a feeble excuse. THIS one has no reason or excuse whatsoever for it not being there.
With this evening's viewing, is our starting point the fade of the Columbia Pictures logo? (I ask because Arnold's opening cue starts with that logo and plays over it, into the first shot.)
I'm paused on the black screen right after the Columbia logo.
This is Thunderbird 2, I am Thunderbird Too.
SABs on regular ready, I am Standing By....
This is Thunderbird 2, how can I be of assistance?
CR06 had a valid artistic reason for not having a normal gunbarrel. SF had a feeble excuse. THIS one has no reason or excuse whatsoever for it not being there.
Agreed.
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
CR06 had a valid artistic reason for not having a normal gunbarrel. SF had a feeble excuse. THIS one has no reason or excuse whatsoever for it not being there.
CR kinda has a gunbarrel sequence. At the end of the PTS, Craig shoots into the camera and you kinda have that moment.
Comments
Yeah I think I remember being confused as to whether she'd been hurt- having someone fall over after a gun is fired at them is pretty standard cinema shorthand for 'they've been shot'!
When M says later 'I passed him on the way in' it's sort of new information rather than anything you were allowed to notice at the time. I don't even remember getting a good idea of how many people are in the room, which makes White's 'person in the room' comment a bit of a cheat.
I guess he just didn't want to do it!
I agree with your D rating: I think it's a very good candidate for worst Bond film. Kind of bizarre it sits there sandwiched between two films I would suggest are right up there vying for the 'best Bond film ever' title. Craig really gets a rollercoaster ride! Let's hope that the downward plunge of Spectre means he's on his way back up with NTTD again!
Yes, we're not presented with enough information. The argument against that is that normally we (the audience) are spoonfed and it makes a change for us to have to work things out for ourselves. It's an argument with which I don't agree. Spoonfed or not, there are cinematic tropes that we have come to expect and it's jarring and disorienting to see them thrown away.
I do hate it when people say 'spoonfed' or 'dumbed down' or anything like that as if giving you information is a bad thing.
I always find Chris McQuarrie's thoughts on filmmaking really interesting, and there's something he always points out which is that when he opens a scene he gives you the geography. For example in that amazing bathroom fight in Mission Impossible Fallout, he first has Ethan and Walker follow the bad guy around the room, and he says he does that so you know the layout of the room so you can follow the fight when it starts. And he's right: it's all very clear.
Or the Quantum guy in that room that we never see kind of reminded me of Silva's gang's approach to Skyfall lodge: you see them walking up to the house in a succession of shots, and in each shot the Aston Martin gets shown a little bit more. Now it's not quite the same thing as he's almost promising the audience that the car is about to do something, but he's giving you the information that it's there- it won't be a cheat when suddenly it starts machine gunning people. It's the difference between good filmmaking and poor filmmaking.
The film's pacing suggests it all happens continuously, and yet time is obviously moving much slower for Mathis once he reappears.
He's been tortured and then relocated to the island where Craig finds him, so presumably months have gone by for him.
I've decided in Casino Royale there is a time gap after Bond reports Vesper's death and Bond showing up at Mr White's house. It appears at first glance to be the very next thing he does, but there's no reason why that final scene should happen so quickly, and Bond at very least must have spent time researching to track him down. So time has gone by, even though the film does not tell us that.
Same at the end of Quantum..., the final scene could happen months after the Bolivia mission ends. So is there also a major time break near the beginning of the movie?
It's like the capturing of Mr White and the scenes in Sienna are their own selfcontained mission that straddles the beginning and end of two completely different films, without being actually part of either film's main story.
Yeah there's a certain amount of time at the clinic (don't we even see the seasons change?) and then they go away on their yacht together, which doesn't seem to be too long- they don't get out of Italy and M calls about the money and you can't believe she's left it for months and months, but long enough for Mathis to be interrogated and released.
That is one really weird choice in Casino Royale: why did they make it look like Mr White's house was right next door to where Bond had been convalescing? Shoot it anywhere else, surely?
I know I’m old but that would have to be one hell of a slow blink
I don’t buy popcorn, I’m too tight to part with any more money after buying the ticket
https://greenwichmeantime.com/
55 minutes till loading up
65 minutes till watching
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Just offering possibilities. How about this?
(Onscreen)
Mr White: ...and the truth is you don't even know we exist.
M: Well, we do now, Mr. White, and we're quick learners.
(Meanwhile, in the audience)
Attractive Companion: (Whispering) Sir Miles! Sir Miles!
Sir Miles: (Whispering) What is it?
Attractive Companion: (Whispering) Who is this Mr White?
Sir Miles: (Whispering) He was in the last movie, I'll explain later over drinks back at my place. Oh, look, James is chasing Mitchell.
...Your attention got diverted for about 0.003 seconds, which is how long most of the shots in any of the action scenes in this film last.
Please load the players and pause right after the Columbia logo
We hit play in 4 minutes
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
This is Thunderbird 2, I am Thunderbird Too.
SABs on regular ready, I am Standing By....
Agreed.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Yeah, I said "normal gunbarrel"