What a double standard you have. Bond killed 25 people in TND. I highly doubt he killed 25 people in QoS.
But I don't have a double standard. Evem if I did, it's my double standard to have.
Seriously, I'm not a big fan of TND, but the thing about it is that it occupies a different universe to QOS. One can only judge a film on the universe in which it is set; Superman can fly in Superman but obviously couldn't in the universe occupied by Hannah and Her Sisters and therefore shouldn't be judged on the universe that is occupied by Hannah and Her Sisters. Whether one loves or hates TND and QOS, they occupy different universes. I'm judging QOS based on its universe.
Bond killed the Bombmaker because it was better than getting captured and letting him escape.
Well, he certainly took a long time to do it. The problem is that he had several opportunities to kill him; his killing him at the end, admittedly to help get away, just didn't wash with me, especially as he was so insignificant.
I have to say, though, that scene really annoys me. The idea that Bond will storm into a foreign embassy is IMO ludicrous. Regardless of the importance of the bombmaker, Bond should not have acted the way he did.
Bond had to kill that guy, because he attacked and tried to kill Bond.
Except Bond is't, or at least doesn't appear to be, a fool. He should have known that there was a chance that he would be attacked; why else would he walk in with his gun drawn? When he was attacked, it didn't seem to me that he made any effort to disable the guy; which he could have based on some of the moves that he showed in other parts of the film.
Just cause it was a more brutal killing, doesn't make it any different than Pierce Brosnan shooting up random lackeys.
It's not just about it being more brutal. It's about the necessity or otherwise, Bond's lack of regret and that QOS occupies a different universe to a film like TND (which, as it happens, was IMO a superior film.)
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I guess I just want a Bond that takes itself seriously, and you don't, which is PERFECTLY fine, and probably more respectable than my view, anyhow.
The one question I want to ask is about the books - I've read most of them, and I'm pretty sure literary Bond takes himself pretty seriously. Loeffs can probably have this argument with you better than I can, but I find a lot in common with Craig's Bond and Fleming's Bond, despite the physical difference that I think we've all beaten to death in this thread. )
Sure ) ) ) And since we've beaten to death that part, I guess we can skip the Fleming resemblance one? ) ) I don't think even in the books he took himself so very seriously.. but ore than that, I see the cleverness, style and wit in the books that I totally miss in Craig's Bond. Fleming himself was pretty amused by the whole process, and did say he didn't want the lorry driver to play Bond ) )
And I think you exactly pointed out the difference in approach. I don't want silly Bond, but I don't want a random badass behaving and looking like a K1 full contact champion either. I think there's middle ground, as Dan said, and that should be where the movies get
Your view is just as respectable as mine of course! Plus I am a Bond GIRL so I'm bound to be more sensitive to certain aspects and to have a dislike for violence more than a strong, manly man! ) ) I guess that makes a difference too? (it better? ))
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
...but I find a lot in common with Craig's Bond and Fleming's Bond, despite the physical difference that I think we've all beaten to death in this thread. )
I agree with you there, 'Shooter. I've been reading over the past few pages...I'm still confused as to how some don't see any regret or humanity in Bond in QoS. I see it in the lead actor's restraint; his internalized pain. True, it isn't addressed with a monologue or a soliloquy, but it is there, however fleeting. To me, the point of the film---a bullet fired from a gun---is that Bond simply has no time for reflection, here. He's got a job to get done...and I think he's driving himself in order to avoid such things. And I think the closure at the end sets the stage for all manner of things so painfully missed by Cinematic Bond Traditionalists everywhere.
I see the trajectory of QoS as a deliberate decision by the director, and not as artistic malpractice. It works for some of us...but obviously not for others---the laundry list of faults and defects, for them, is just insurmountable---and that's fair enough. No minds are being changed; it's just thousands of words flying back and forth (mostly forth).
I don't have a problem hearing negative comments on the latest Bond film or the current lead actor; I've been hearing these things for three years now---what else is new?? Anyone who read my review of QoS knows that I was honest and forthcoming in addressing what I view as the film's shortcomings. For my own part (and there are at least a couple of Bond fans who agree with me), I like the new film more every time I see it---flaws notwithstanding---and to me, it is James Bond.
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
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
I think you and I are of the same mind on QoS, Loeffs - while others see Bond as typical action hero without remorse, we both read scores more into Craig's performance. We see his pain, his struggle, his beliefs - without needing a monologue to understand them.
I think you and I are of the same mind on QoS, Loeffs - while others see Bond as typical action hero without remorse, we both read scores more into Craig's performance. We see his pain, his struggle, his beliefs - without needing a monologue to understand them.
That is very good and it's great that you enjoy him so much. Certainly pleasant to see that someone gets to be entertained But I really don't need a monologue to understand certain things. I simply don't see them as I don't find his portrayal of the agent as good as you do. What you find "nuanced" I find simply brutal or Robocop-style. Because we don't look for the same things in a Bond portrayal and in a Bond actor and movie. That's where it is. It's not about understanding, it's about what one likes or dislikes, at least to me.
On a lighter note, I saw Letterman making fun of the new Bond (annnd he did have the same kind of gripe most casual viewers have: no gadgets, no fun... and he of course said it in a much funnier way than any of us could). I must say it was hilarious to see this guy (totally un-Bond) whose name was James Bond do the top ten... ) ) )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
Yet another difference between us, I'm afraid - I don't think Letterman has been funny for years. :v
I think you and I are of the same mind on QoS, Loeffs - while others see Bond as typical action hero without remorse, we both read scores more into Craig's performance. We see his pain, his struggle, his beliefs - without needing a monologue to understand them.
Yep, that's right, the rest of us just aren't intelligent enough to see it.
I see no remorse there, but then he is killing bad guys after all. Nothing unsettled either like the need for whisky after a brutal fight out as in CR.
Yet another difference between us, I'm afraid - I don't think Letterman has been funny for years. :v
Definitely a difference because I adore Letterman, especially seen my job. And I think he has been a much better journalist during the elections than my actual colleagues... ) )
I guess it's in my family though, even my dad and mom (and my mom doesn't speak English, she just reads the subtitles) love him.
Ahem, sorry for the OT, but it started with Letterman on Bond, so..
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
I think you and I are of the same mind on QoS, Loeffs - while others see Bond as typical action hero without remorse, we both read scores more into Craig's performance. We see his pain, his struggle, his beliefs - without needing a monologue to understand them.
Yep, that's right, the rest of us just aren't intelligent enough to see it.
Yeah, Barry, that is exactly what I meant. 8-)
We read Craig's performance differently. Whether I am reading things into it, and Craig really is a glorified Robocop, is up to each of us.
saw it for a third time last night and kind of got bored near the end, for some reason it doesnt seem to hold up as well after repeated viewings as well as CR for me, and i was in one of the biggest screens at the the movie theater had and it was was 1/3 full. Craig is still truely superb as 007 and as a fellow actor (or soon to be) i can really appreciate the little touches in his performance. But three times may be enough for me on this one....
saw it for a third time last night and kind of got bored near the end, for some reason it doesnt seem to hold up as well after repeated viewings as well as CR for me...three times may be enough for me on this one...
I've seen it twice and I did feel that the 2nd time around. I can watch CR over and over, but QoS seems it was made, intentionally or not, for the "fresh," viewing experience (duh, I suppose all movies are made with this in mind ), but much more visceral than normal, kind of like a video game or xtreme sport activity. I did nod off a few times and found that the experiential factor has worn off a lot since my 1st viewing. Nonetheless, I wouldn't mind a 3rd viewing!
Somewhat related to the other topics on the film's violence, gratuituous attempted rape scene, jarring camera effects, abrupt editing, etc., all of those points make sense if there was a great emphasis made on the experience vs. substance, and if true and intentional, speaks a alot about their target audience, the X and Y generations.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
A couple of people at work saw it over the weekend and found it disappointing. My brother has said on reflection he too is now disappointed with it.
The criticism seems to be the usual suspects too - lack of coherency in action scenes, didn't feel involved, too rushed, lack of decent storyline, not enough quieter moments in the film.
There is definitely a pattern emerging here. These were all people who loved CR too. My mate may have summed it up perfectly by saying going into CR he wasn't expecting anything that great, and was completely blown away afterwards, yet with QoS, the expectations were now extremely high because of CR, and it didn't live up to it.
Is QoS a misunderstood masterpiece, or a film EON just didn't get quite right this time round, despite having decent intentions while making it?
My opinion is that EON is trying too hard to do something different. While I can appreciate the artistic desire to do something different, I think they're straying to far from the elements that made James Bond films great and fun to watch (notice I said films, not novels). One may dislike Roger Moore, but there are scenes which are incredible to watch - the ski jump, for instance. I was enthralled by the free-running sequence in CR. Effort was made to make that action sequence something you hadn't seen on the movie screen to that level before. QoS, on the other hand, fails at distinguishing itself from other films.
Imagine Colonel Sanders deciding he was tired of serving up the same chicken, so he takes out his special herbs and spices. What's left? The same fried chicken you can get anywhere.
- dismally weak villian
- final fight scene at the hotel was inappropriate place
- not enough sex scene
- Bond doesn't shoot automatic rifles
- boat chase scene wasn't bad it could been done better
- the whole story plot was weak
- there should be more naked scene of the ladies.
Personally, I loved QOS and I really can't be bothered justifying myself.
Someone at work today said he'd seen it - usual complaints of 'cut - cut - cut'. Except when I asked about the 'gratuitous groin shot' he didn't remember it. At which point the other guys in the office told him he can't have been paying attention if he missed something like that
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
The sex scene in DAD was one of the parts that I really hated. It has no place in a Bond film. It was badly done, bad taste, poor show etc etc etc.
On the other hand, the attempted rape in QOS caused me no problems at all.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Well, the news isn't getting any better for The Reviled QoSTM...here are a couple of reviews plucked at random...
"Quantum of Suckage is like having red-hot knitting needles poked straight through your eyeballs. I'd rather go to the proctologist...or a funeral. Or a proctologist's funeral." - Reg Gleason
"I thought Quantum of Sausage was just dreadful. When I was a little girl, I was once struck on the head by a bloody great bag of hammers. In hospital, there was a young resident nurse shrieking in my ear, asking me if I was alright. I believe I vomited. Quantum of Sausage was just like this, except without the nurse." - Hazel Lance-Pustule (Mrs.)
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
Well, the news isn't getting any better for The Reviled QoSTM...here are a couple of reviews plucked at random...
"Quantum of Suckage is like having red-hot knitting needles poked straight through your eyeballs. I'd rather go to the proctologist...or a funeral. Or a proctologist's funeral." - Reg Gleason
"I thought Quantum of Sausage was just dreadful. When I was a little girl, I was once struck on the head by a bloody great bag of hammers. In hospital, there was a young resident nurse shrieking in my ear, asking me if I was alright. I believe I vomited. Quantum of Sausage was just like this, except without the nurse." - Hazel Lance-Pustule (Mrs.)
) ) ) Ouch !!!!
Bella_docQuantum's next target (Canada)Posts: 51MI6 Agent
My opinion is that EON is trying too hard to do something different. While I can appreciate the artistic desire to do something different, I think they're straying to far from the elements that made James Bond films great and fun to watch (notice I said films, not novels)...Effort was made to make [the free-running] action sequence [in CR] something you hadn't seen on the movie screen to that level before. QoS, on the other hand, fails at distinguishing itself from other films.
ITA. My boss just saw it this weekend and didn't like, for the usual litany of reasons --confusing action sequences, rushed storyline, etc. The thing is that CR already did a fantastic job of establishing a dark and gritty new tone for the series (in the most shaken-not-stirred sense possible, of course), so it's a bit baffling as to why EON felt it had something to prove by revisiting the same territory with 10 x the noise and brutality. We get it, Bond's a Badass. Now give him something else to do.
To put it another way, in CR Bond held his own in the new Bournian action-movie landscape without becoming another hopeless immitator. Then in QoS it's as if he experienced a sudden loss of confidence and overcompensated by trying out-Bourne Bourne --quite disheartening.
What's interesting to me is, first with Craig's casting in CR and now with Forster's direction of QOS, how calculated these choices are by EON. Not like they don't know what the reaction is going to be to these not-the-norm decisions they keep making. I guess MGW wasn't just whistling Dixie when he said of DAD, it was as far as they could take Bond in that direction, and time to head off in a new one - with Craig. And now, QOS. I don't see this pattern changing anytime soon, given the BO successes of both films. I can see the next one ending up somewhere in between CR and QOS style-wise, but EON doesn't seem all that interested in looking backwards, only forging ahead and whatever collateral damage to the fan base accepted as necessary losses (cuz, there's new fans being made everyday?).
Imagine Colonel Sanders deciding he was tired of serving up the same chicken, so he takes out his special herbs and spices. What's left? The same fried chicken you can get anywhere.
Well, the news isn't getting any better for The Reviled QoSTM...here are a couple of reviews plucked at random...
"Quantum of Suckage is like having red-hot knitting needles poked straight through your eyeballs. I'd rather go to the proctologist...or a funeral. Or a proctologist's funeral." - Reg Gleason
"I thought Quantum of Sausage was just dreadful. When I was a little girl, I was once struck on the head by a bloody great bag of hammers. In hospital, there was a young resident nurse shrieking in my ear, asking me if I was alright. I believe I vomited. Quantum of Sausage was just like this, except without the nurse." - Hazel Lance-Pustule (Mrs.)
I know I shouldn't laugh, but ) ) ) This is a bit much isn't it?! I mean I didn't like it at all but I wouldn't get to such points! Not like it was torture to watch it. It was disappointing because I didn't see what I expect and pretend from a Bond movie, but I'd take that ANY day over a proctologist!! COME ON!! ) ) ) ) I'm laughing so hard though, how do people even come up with such thoughts?! I have a very good one from a private networking site I am a member of, but it being private I'm not allowed to post it.
My opinion is that EON is trying too hard to do something different. While I can appreciate the artistic desire to do something different, I think they're straying to far from the elements that made James Bond films great and fun to watch (notice I said films, not novels)...Effort was made to make [the free-running] action sequence [in CR] something you hadn't seen on the movie screen to that level before. QoS, on the other hand, fails at distinguishing itself from other films.
I completely agree. Most casual viewers I have read reviews of (on the private site I mentioned) have the exact gripes people have reported on here. Basically doesn't "feel" like a James Bond movie to them. The list is always the same.
Now I'm not talking huge numbers of people obviously, so can't speak for big public, I have read what, probably a couple of dozen of reviews on there. Yet the common element is there. Probably what glidrose was talking about, though there may be many faces for it.
I'm not entirely sure EON are doing this while knowing what the reaction's gonna be, in that despite polling the public when a movie is made, they can't know in full what the general reaction is going to be. I do think they got too carried away because of the success of CR. I hope they fix it with the next one, that's all. Though seen as they asked Forster to do another one I am not entirely sure they intend to change the QoS type ofdirection at all? I think until they appoint a new actor that they will stick with this direction. Maybe I'm just resigned ) ), hurts less for the next one ) )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
Imagine Colonel Sanders deciding he was tired of serving up the same chicken, so he takes out his special herbs and spices. What's left? The same fried chicken you can get anywhere.
Now this is a great example. Perfectly illustrates the point. AND made me hungry!? )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
Comments
Seriously, I'm not a big fan of TND, but the thing about it is that it occupies a different universe to QOS. One can only judge a film on the universe in which it is set; Superman can fly in Superman but obviously couldn't in the universe occupied by Hannah and Her Sisters and therefore shouldn't be judged on the universe that is occupied by Hannah and Her Sisters. Whether one loves or hates TND and QOS, they occupy different universes. I'm judging QOS based on its universe.
Well, he certainly took a long time to do it. The problem is that he had several opportunities to kill him; his killing him at the end, admittedly to help get away, just didn't wash with me, especially as he was so insignificant.
I have to say, though, that scene really annoys me. The idea that Bond will storm into a foreign embassy is IMO ludicrous. Regardless of the importance of the bombmaker, Bond should not have acted the way he did.
Except Bond is't, or at least doesn't appear to be, a fool. He should have known that there was a chance that he would be attacked; why else would he walk in with his gun drawn? When he was attacked, it didn't seem to me that he made any effort to disable the guy; which he could have based on some of the moves that he showed in other parts of the film.
It's not just about it being more brutal. It's about the necessity or otherwise, Bond's lack of regret and that QOS occupies a different universe to a film like TND (which, as it happens, was IMO a superior film.)
Sure
And I think you exactly pointed out the difference in approach. I don't want silly Bond, but I don't want a random badass behaving and looking like a K1 full contact champion either. I think there's middle ground, as Dan said, and that should be where the movies get
Your view is just as respectable as mine of course! Plus I am a Bond GIRL so I'm bound to be more sensitive to certain aspects and to have a dislike for violence more than a strong, manly man!
No, he can't
I agree with you there, 'Shooter. I've been reading over the past few pages...I'm still confused as to how some don't see any regret or humanity in Bond in QoS. I see it in the lead actor's restraint; his internalized pain. True, it isn't addressed with a monologue or a soliloquy, but it is there, however fleeting. To me, the point of the film---a bullet fired from a gun---is that Bond simply has no time for reflection, here. He's got a job to get done...and I think he's driving himself in order to avoid such things. And I think the closure at the end sets the stage for all manner of things so painfully missed by Cinematic Bond Traditionalists everywhere.
I see the trajectory of QoS as a deliberate decision by the director, and not as artistic malpractice. It works for some of us...but obviously not for others---the laundry list of faults and defects, for them, is just insurmountable---and that's fair enough. No minds are being changed; it's just thousands of words flying back and forth (mostly forth).
I don't have a problem hearing negative comments on the latest Bond film or the current lead actor; I've been hearing these things for three years now---what else is new?? Anyone who read my review of QoS knows that I was honest and forthcoming in addressing what I view as the film's shortcomings. For my own part (and there are at least a couple of Bond fans who agree with me), I like the new film more every time I see it---flaws notwithstanding---and to me, it is James Bond.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
That is very good and it's great that you enjoy him so much. Certainly pleasant to see that someone gets to be entertained
On a lighter note, I saw Letterman making fun of the new Bond (annnd he did have the same kind of gripe most casual viewers have: no gadgets, no fun... and he of course said it in a much funnier way than any of us could). I must say it was hilarious to see this guy (totally un-Bond) whose name was James Bond do the top ten...
Yep, that's right, the rest of us just aren't intelligent enough to see it.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Definitely a difference because I adore Letterman, especially seen my job. And I think he has been a much better journalist during the elections than my actual colleagues...
I guess it's in my family though, even my dad and mom (and my mom doesn't speak English, she just reads the subtitles) love him.
Ahem, sorry for the OT, but it started with Letterman on Bond, so..
Yeah, Barry, that is exactly what I meant. 8-)
We read Craig's performance differently. Whether I am reading things into it, and Craig really is a glorified Robocop, is up to each of us.
I've seen it twice and I did feel that the 2nd time around. I can watch CR over and over, but QoS seems it was made, intentionally or not, for the "fresh," viewing experience (duh, I suppose all movies are made with this in mind
Somewhat related to the other topics on the film's violence, gratuituous attempted rape scene, jarring camera effects, abrupt editing, etc., all of those points make sense if there was a great emphasis made on the experience vs. substance, and if true and intentional, speaks a alot about their target audience, the X and Y generations.
The criticism seems to be the usual suspects too - lack of coherency in action scenes, didn't feel involved, too rushed, lack of decent storyline, not enough quieter moments in the film.
There is definitely a pattern emerging here. These were all people who loved CR too. My mate may have summed it up perfectly by saying going into CR he wasn't expecting anything that great, and was completely blown away afterwards, yet with QoS, the expectations were now extremely high because of CR, and it didn't live up to it.
Is QoS a misunderstood masterpiece, or a film EON just didn't get quite right this time round, despite having decent intentions while making it?
Imagine Colonel Sanders deciding he was tired of serving up the same chicken, so he takes out his special herbs and spices. What's left? The same fried chicken you can get anywhere.
- dismally weak villian
- final fight scene at the hotel was inappropriate place
- not enough sex scene
- Bond doesn't shoot automatic rifles
- boat chase scene wasn't bad it could been done better
- the whole story plot was weak
- there should be more naked scene of the ladies.
Someone at work today said he'd seen it - usual complaints of 'cut - cut - cut'. Except when I asked about the 'gratuitous groin shot' he didn't remember it. At which point the other guys in the office told him he can't have been paying attention if he missed something like that
hilarious!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
The sex scene in DAD was one of the parts that I really hated. It has no place in a Bond film. It was badly done, bad taste, poor show etc etc etc.
On the other hand, the attempted rape in QOS caused me no problems at all.
"Quantum of Suckage is like having red-hot knitting needles poked straight through your eyeballs. I'd rather go to the proctologist...or a funeral. Or a proctologist's funeral." - Reg Gleason
"I thought Quantum of Sausage was just dreadful. When I was a little girl, I was once struck on the head by a bloody great bag of hammers. In hospital, there was a young resident nurse shrieking in my ear, asking me if I was alright. I believe I vomited. Quantum of Sausage was just like this, except without the nurse." - Hazel Lance-Pustule (Mrs.)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
ITA. My boss just saw it this weekend and didn't like, for the usual litany of reasons --confusing action sequences, rushed storyline, etc. The thing is that CR already did a fantastic job of establishing a dark and gritty new tone for the series (in the most shaken-not-stirred sense possible, of course), so it's a bit baffling as to why EON felt it had something to prove by revisiting the same territory with 10 x the noise and brutality. We get it, Bond's a Badass. Now give him something else to do.
To put it another way, in CR Bond held his own in the new Bournian action-movie landscape without becoming another hopeless immitator. Then in QoS it's as if he experienced a sudden loss of confidence and overcompensated by trying out-Bourne Bourne --quite disheartening.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Perfect analogy
I know I shouldn't laugh, but
Anyway I think darenhat nailed the matter.
I completely agree. Most casual viewers I have read reviews of (on the private site I mentioned) have the exact gripes people have reported on here. Basically doesn't "feel" like a James Bond movie to them. The list is always the same.
Now I'm not talking huge numbers of people obviously, so can't speak for big public, I have read what, probably a couple of dozen of reviews on there. Yet the common element is there. Probably what glidrose was talking about, though there may be many faces for it.
I'm not entirely sure EON are doing this while knowing what the reaction's gonna be, in that despite polling the public when a movie is made, they can't know in full what the general reaction is going to be. I do think they got too carried away because of the success of CR. I hope they fix it with the next one, that's all. Though seen as they asked Forster to do another one I am not entirely sure they intend to change the QoS type ofdirection at all? I think until they appoint a new actor that they will stick with this direction. Maybe I'm just resigned
Now this is a great example. Perfectly illustrates the point. AND made me hungry!?
Oh I do really hope so {[]