sorry but that's nonsense!
Craig is suave and as dashing as all the other bonds and more so than the smarmy catalogue model with a dodgy irish/american accent: brosnan. i still fid it hard to get past connery's glaswegian accent. i can't believe the craig hating-i don't much like the new direction either-i've seen QOS twice-but craig isn't the problem. watch the brosnan films again and tell me that's bondian. he's more like a lanky, dorky , skinny uncle
honestly...
I don't think it's any nonsense, it's just my opinion and my taste, obviously different from yours, and that's good since we can't all ike the same things.
I own the Brosnan movies on DVD and (aside from DAD obviously) I love them and I think he was a great, great James Bond. Classy, stylish, ruthless when necessary, witty, and with the right percentage of "son of a bitch but irresistible" in him.
I don't see suave, I don't see charm, I don't see good looks and least of all style in anything Craig does. I just see a random badass, who could be anyone, as I've explained. That's not nonsense, it's just my preference. You can absolutely keep Craig, I will never fight any woman for him ) )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
I had no idea Pierce Brosnan was a transvestite. :v
) ) ) ) ) ) does that imply you think I am A MAN?!?!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? ) ) ) ) )
No. I was implying you like a man who looks like a woman. :v )
) ) )
Having seen him in person, I can assure you that is NOT the case. He's one of the best looking men I have met. And not just that... he's also incredibly charming. And intelligent. Pierce has it all. And I mean this as a person, Bond-regardless.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
Craig is suave and as dashing as all the other bonds and more so than the smarmy catalogue model with a dodgy irish/american accent: brosnan.
I think that even Craig fans (except the most fanatical ones) would not argue that he is more dashing than Brosnan and Connery. One might argue that Craig looks more believable as a ruthless killer than Brosnan (although I sometimes get tired of watching him walking around with an air of "I'm the baddest man here, and I know it").
Alessandra, for what it's worth, I think you have great taste in Bond {[]
While I enjoyed this instalment I felt it had a lot more potential.
The Good:
-Thought Craig really grew into the role and was a lot more comfortable as Bond this time around.
-Title sequence was awesome. Possibly my favourite ever which is saying a lot as I hated the song the first time I seen it.
-Loved the Goldfinger reference.
-Bonds wardrobe was great. Tom Ford did the suits this time around and they really looked razor sharp.
-I thought it looked really beautiful. You could really tell it was made by a more arthouse director.
The Bad
-The fundamental plot is weak. Its not particularly interesting and it doesnt drive the film well imo.
-Probably the most bland bond villain ever. Barely does anything on screen and his evil plan is to control 60% of Bolivia's water and charge the government twice what they normally pay? Terrifying. I know they are trying to make it more realistic but you lose some of that spice and fun when you play it too straight.
-The opening car chase and the rooftop chase in Italy had the potential to be two of the greatest action sequences in any Bond movie. Shame we could'nt see them
-Plot was convoluted and the film generally lacked structure.
-It just didnt felt like a Bond film. Cant put my finger on what it was exactly but it just didnt feel like Bond. I think Bond has always had a very spefic tone, Light and amusing but at the same time dark and serious. I get their moving it more to a darker more serious Bond but there still has to be a balance and they did not get that right imo.
All in all I think they have tried to do something new but in the process they have neutered bond and made the character into a rather dull Bourne clone. I love the idea of taken the character to darker places (after all Fleming Bond was always dark) but you have to have some of the fun and silliness as well. Thats what makes Bond Bond.
I think films like Dr. No, FRWL and Goldfinger nailed this...Bond was a dark, serious character but they where fun films and never took themselves too seriously. I would like to see a return to that and also to a more structured traditional Bond plot.
All in all I think they have tried to do something new but in the process they have neutered bond and made the character into a rather dull Bourne clone. I love the idea of taken the character to darker places (after all Fleming Bond was always dark) but you have to have some of the fun and silliness as well. Thats what makes Bond Bond.
I think films like Dr. No, FRWL and Goldfinger nailed this...Bond was a dark, serious character but they where fun films and never took themselves too seriously. I would like to see a return to that and also to a more structured traditional Bond plot.
AMEN. I couldn't have said it better.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
Craig is suave and as dashing as all the other bonds and more so than the smarmy catalogue model with a dodgy irish/american accent: brosnan.
I think that even Craig fans (except the most fanatical ones) would not argue that he is more dashing than Brosnan and Connery. One might argue that Craig looks more believable as a ruthless killer than Brosnan (although I sometimes get tired of watching him walking around with an air of "I'm the baddest man here, and I know it").
Alessandra, for what it's worth, I think you have great taste in Bond {[]
Thank you frostbitten. {[] And ITA about your Craig assessments above. Badass, we get it. Now show me James Bond. That's how I feel in general watching Craig. And I never see the Bond surface, sadly Again, just me and my very personal perception.
I just think QoS really exasperated this aspect, with the result that Maherj1 well underlined in his review.. Sadly, not the Bond I want to see and I've come to love.
?:) this was supposed to be one post, I did two. I must've clicked quote instead of edit. Sorry.
"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
...since we need a younger Bond for the next one, there's this young man, called Henry Cavill:
Tall? Check. Dark? Check. Blue-eyed? Check. Gorgeous? MAJOR check. ) And sexy as hell, yet with an air of "I might kill you someday" to him.
This is the Bond of the future, in my humble opinion. He was my final preference, in the weeks/months prior to Craig's announcement. By the time Craig hangs it up, Henry ought to be ready :007)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
All in all I think they have tried to do something new but in the process they have neutered bond and made the character into a rather dull Bourne clone. I love the idea of taken the character to darker places (after all Fleming Bond was always dark) but you have to have some of the fun and silliness as well. Thats what makes Bond Bond.
I think films like Dr. No, FRWL and Goldfinger nailed this...Bond was a dark, serious character but they where fun films and never took themselves too seriously. I would like to see a return to that and also to a more structured traditional Bond plot.
Great post.
I really wanted to like this film but it just felt like any other action film for much of the time and had me a little bored occasionally too. The plot and chase scenes are all ridiculous, yet the tone of the film is absolutely straight which I don't understand.
In the next movie I hope that they can make it lighter and also can add a bit more character and plot and not have quite so many predictable chase scenes.
This is the Bond of the future, in my humble opinion. He was my final preference, in the weeks/months prior to Craig's announcement. By the time Craig hangs it up, Henry ought to be ready :007)
I also think Cavill has a good chance of becoming Bond #7. After all, Eon has a history of going back to candidates that they had previously considered for the role when it's time to replace the incumbent Bond actor (like their going back to Brosnan for GE, after having tested him for TLD).
Hi guys, I am a long time hardcore bond fan. Anyway I feel that ‘Quantum of Solace’ has been very badly reviewed for such an amazing movie. Now I know that it doesn’t really hold a candle to the pure guineas of ‘Casino Royal’, but I believe that this is purely down to the fact that it is the first direct sequel in the James Bond franchise. Therefore it is effectively ‘Casino Royal 2’, it brings back many of the cast members from ‘Casino Royal’ and ties up all the loose ends as well as throwing in all the action a devoted fan could ask for. At the same time Craig’s portrayal of a darker, gritty bond is again perfect. Many critics have said that he seems to kills to much and without good reason in ‘Quantum of Solace’, but anyone with a brain can see how devastated he was about Vesper’s suicide and betrayal at the end of ‘Casino Royal’. Therefor it is perfectly expectable that the sequel shows a darker, colder James Bond out for revenge. ‘Quantum of Solace’ really pays homage to the original bond movies and yet still manages to stay fresh and contemporary (e.g. the music, bond girl covered in oil, etc). One of the biggest criticisms of the film is its use of humour, but this is not “Roger Moore” humour, it is a clever and subtle wit that truly complements the action.
To many people have gone into the cinema expecting to see an amazing stand-alone Bond movie, which ‘Quantum of Solace’ doesn’t quite fulfil. However many people have failed to see a great sequel to, in my opinion, the greatest Bond movie ever made ‘Casino Royal’
Cheers
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited November 2008
Cheers, olliemills! {[] And welcome to AJB! I hope you stick around and enjoy the site---it's always great to hear somebody say they enjoyed the new Bond film...We Yanks are still yet to see it ( X-( ), and the slaggers are having the time of their lives...
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
I have seen the movie yesterday as a pre-premiere in Germany:
I must say, that it did not touch me at all!
It left me as cold as when I have seen AVTAK in the cinema.
Some people say, that it is the worst 007 movie, but nothing can ever top DAF!
I agree, that the cutting of the action scenes is too fast and that Bond mutated to a plain killer.
The car chase could have been so much more with the beautiful locations - chance missed.
I find 007s behaviour sometimes not very thought-thru in regards of precautions to make sure, that he's not getting killed before his mission is over.
I find the M-007 story pretty entertaining, it is the first movie, that I have really enjoyed Dame Judy.
The finale could have been so much better and DC looks 10 years older than in CR.
I find it a good action movie but this is not enogh for a 007 movie. I wonder, where the all the US$ 160.000.000 production money went into.
And after still digesting the movie, I am realizing, what kind of masterpiece CR was.
I will not see it again in the cinema.
I'll wait for the DVD and the following movie.
As a good friend from the UK said: Expect the worst.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Cheers, olliemills! {[] And welcome to AJB! I hope you stick around and enjoy the site---it's always great to hear somebody say they enjoyed the new Bond film...We Yanks are still yet to see it ( X-( ), and the slaggers are having the time of their lives...
I for one find no joy at all in being a lifelong Bond fan who is really bitterly disapointed by QOS, particularly after finding so much to enjoy in CR. Like most of us I have been eagerly following progress of this film & counting the days to it's release. It's true that late in the day I was finding some of the reports worrying (short run time, twice the action, Forsters comments re having to rush the cutting of the film to meet the deadline, terrible song...)
I was still was hoping that they could pull it off, and I also calibrated my expectations to account for CR setting the bar so high as QOS was unlkely to hit that kind of high spot, but could still have been a really good Bond Film.
Despite all that, QOS failed to even get close to my pragmatic and lowered expectations. This is not an ideological position, or the determined view of a gleeful 'slagger', there is no happiness in this but a real disapointment from a fan. I feel let down as it could have been great, and posting an honest view in no way compensates for that.
I really hope that you find more to enjoy than I could.
and the slaggers are having the time of their lives...
Tell me about it. I need reinforcements Loeff. It's like Dawn of the Dead on here. I'm completely surrounded and I'm down to my last box of ammo and a tennis racket from the sports department.
If the 'Slaggers' have their way, your be down to your last exploding sandwich, body smashing plaster cast or flame throwing snake charming pipe! But if things get too bad jump into the invisible Aston and disappear to the secret ice palace.
On a second note, maybe I should create a separate post for every amazing piece of film making excellence that Quantum of Solace demonstrates to balance up the negativity that some seem to like to revel in.
On a second note, maybe I should create a separate post for every amazing piece of film making excellence that Quantum of Solace demonstrates to balance up the negativity that some seem to like to revel in.
Cheers, olliemills! {[] And welcome to AJB! I hope you stick around and enjoy the site---it's always great to hear somebody say they enjoyed the new Bond film...We Yanks are still yet to see it ( X-( ), and the slaggers are having the time of their lives...
Loeffs darling, you and I have always gotten on very well.. and we always will. So I feel like telling you that calling us slaggers is just uncalled for. I don't take delight in NOT enjoying Bond. At all. I actually don't like this situation at all, and I WISH I could see what I want on screen but I just don't see it. The reviews of CRITICS too (who all raved about CR) are in general very, very poor. These are critics, not fans. They don't take any delight in slamming anything down, they just do their job.
They put up an entire page on Corriere della Sera today, and this critic who raved about CR (though to be fair the main critic of the newspaper slammed CR, which surprised me as I agreed with every single word he had said )) completely axed QoS. The main title is "gun fights and car chases. So has failed the challenge to modernise Bond" And this is from someone who raved about Craig and CR. The critic says Craig COULD have worked in this movie, if only they had given him much better material and kept a more psychological and lighter approach "instead of turning it into a nonstop, nonsensical sequence of car chases, gun and non gun fights that make the viewers' heads spin".
.The critic also goes on and says that Bond's relationship with alcohol is ridiculed in this movie (I think someone mentioned this in the long reviews and they were slammed for saying so) not to mention the Bond girl part (I won't say the rest as we don't give out spoilers here. And he concludes saying that too many classic fundamental elements of Bond that make him Bond are missing, and they need to bring those back. And that the references to scenes from the past that were real Bond moments (again I won't specify) only make the spectator long for the old Bond, seeing the comparison with this one.
Now the above are basically the gripes most of us have. And this is a critic, not a fan. And again, one who RAVED about CR. So I really don't think we're slammers. We're just people who didn't enjoy the movie, and/or people (like me) who not only don't enjoy the movie but also don't enjoy Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond in general ) ) It's not fun. It's disappointing. And I find it very unfair that those who dare criticise very often receive rude remarks.
I've never had a problem, and I truly enjoy talking to both those who enjoy Craig's Bond and those who don't enjoy, but I have noticed this "trend" about QoS and I frankly think it is unfair. We have a right to dislike things or like things, and neither of the two "categories" should be insulted because they feel a certain way. We're disappointed fans who feel QoS doesn't deliver, not slammers having the time of their life.
And on a good note:
I KNEW I could count on you for Henry, Loeffs I really hope he becomes Bond no.7. It'd be the right change... and well, back to drooling over my favourite spy for me ) ) )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
...since we need a younger Bond for the next one, there's this young man, called Henry Cavill:
Tall? Check. Dark? Check. Blue-eyed? Check. Gorgeous? MAJOR check. ) And sexy as hell, yet with an air of "I might kill you someday" to him.
This is the Bond of the future, in my humble opinion. He was my final preference, in the weeks/months prior to Craig's announcement. By the time Craig hangs it up, Henry ought to be ready :007)
sorry but he looks like a girly fashion model. far to pretty.
i will concede, tho, that what eon really needs is a mixture of brosnan and craig. the smooth and the rough. brosnan never convinces as tough enough,too tall and lanky IMO, but (after watching QOS for the 3rd time today) craig could do with a bit more refinement. perhaps eon will listen to the criticism and give us that next time. craig should smile and wink a bit more, and the tone should lighten a bit...
Actually I'm getting impatient for our American friends to see this film so they can put in their forepenneth... it will be strange their leafing thru all this backchat - reams of it- two weeks later. Then again, they've had an election to think about; guess that was another reason, surprisingly not mentioned, to delay the release in the US.
Comments
I don't think it's any nonsense, it's just my opinion and my taste, obviously different from yours, and that's good since we can't all ike the same things.
I own the Brosnan movies on DVD and (aside from DAD obviously) I love them and I think he was a great, great James Bond. Classy, stylish, ruthless when necessary, witty, and with the right percentage of "son of a bitch but irresistible" in him.
I don't see suave, I don't see charm, I don't see good looks and least of all style in anything Craig does. I just see a random badass, who could be anyone, as I've explained. That's not nonsense, it's just my preference. You can absolutely keep Craig, I will never fight any woman for him
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Hey enough of trying to trash one of my TV boyfriends here
I had no idea Pierce Brosnan was a transvestite. :v
an easy mistake to make as he's so feminine, not rugged like connery and craig
No. I was implying you like a man who looks like a woman. :v
Having seen him in person, I can assure you that is NOT the case. He's one of the best looking men I have met. And not just that... he's also incredibly charming. And intelligent. Pierce has it all. And I mean this as a person, Bond-regardless.
I think that even Craig fans (except the most fanatical ones) would not argue that he is more dashing than Brosnan and Connery. One might argue that Craig looks more believable as a ruthless killer than Brosnan (although I sometimes get tired of watching him walking around with an air of "I'm the baddest man here, and I know it").
Alessandra, for what it's worth, I think you have great taste in Bond {[]
The Good:
-Thought Craig really grew into the role and was a lot more comfortable as Bond this time around.
-Title sequence was awesome. Possibly my favourite ever which is saying a lot as I hated the song the first time I seen it.
-Loved the Goldfinger reference.
-Bonds wardrobe was great. Tom Ford did the suits this time around and they really looked razor sharp.
-I thought it looked really beautiful. You could really tell it was made by a more arthouse director.
The Bad
-The fundamental plot is weak. Its not particularly interesting and it doesnt drive the film well imo.
-Probably the most bland bond villain ever. Barely does anything on screen and his evil plan is to control 60% of Bolivia's water and charge the government twice what they normally pay? Terrifying. I know they are trying to make it more realistic but you lose some of that spice and fun when you play it too straight.
-The opening car chase and the rooftop chase in Italy had the potential to be two of the greatest action sequences in any Bond movie. Shame we could'nt see them
-Plot was convoluted and the film generally lacked structure.
-It just didnt felt like a Bond film. Cant put my finger on what it was exactly but it just didnt feel like Bond. I think Bond has always had a very spefic tone, Light and amusing but at the same time dark and serious. I get their moving it more to a darker more serious Bond but there still has to be a balance and they did not get that right imo.
All in all I think they have tried to do something new but in the process they have neutered bond and made the character into a rather dull Bourne clone. I love the idea of taken the character to darker places (after all Fleming Bond was always dark) but you have to have some of the fun and silliness as well. Thats what makes Bond Bond.
I think films like Dr. No, FRWL and Goldfinger nailed this...Bond was a dark, serious character but they where fun films and never took themselves too seriously. I would like to see a return to that and also to a more structured traditional Bond plot.
AMEN. I couldn't have said it better.
Thank you frostbitten. {[] And ITA about your Craig assessments above. Badass, we get it. Now show me James Bond. That's how I feel in general watching Craig. And I never see the Bond surface, sadly
I just think QoS really exasperated this aspect, with the result that Maherj1 well underlined in his review.. Sadly, not the Bond I want to see and I've come to love.
?:) this was supposed to be one post, I did two. I must've clicked quote instead of edit. Sorry.
This is the Bond of the future, in my humble opinion. He was my final preference, in the weeks/months prior to Craig's announcement. By the time Craig hangs it up, Henry ought to be ready :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Great post.
I really wanted to like this film but it just felt like any other action film for much of the time and had me a little bored occasionally too. The plot and chase scenes are all ridiculous, yet the tone of the film is absolutely straight which I don't understand.
In the next movie I hope that they can make it lighter and also can add a bit more character and plot and not have quite so many predictable chase scenes.
I also think Cavill has a good chance of becoming Bond #7. After all, Eon has a history of going back to candidates that they had previously considered for the role when it's time to replace the incumbent Bond actor (like their going back to Brosnan for GE, after having tested him for TLD).
To many people have gone into the cinema expecting to see an amazing stand-alone Bond movie, which ‘Quantum of Solace’ doesn’t quite fulfil. However many people have failed to see a great sequel to, in my opinion, the greatest Bond movie ever made ‘Casino Royal’
Cheers
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I must say, that it did not touch me at all!
It left me as cold as when I have seen AVTAK in the cinema.
Some people say, that it is the worst 007 movie, but nothing can ever top DAF!
I agree, that the cutting of the action scenes is too fast and that Bond mutated to a plain killer.
The car chase could have been so much more with the beautiful locations - chance missed.
I find 007s behaviour sometimes not very thought-thru in regards of precautions to make sure, that he's not getting killed before his mission is over.
I find the M-007 story pretty entertaining, it is the first movie, that I have really enjoyed Dame Judy.
The finale could have been so much better and DC looks 10 years older than in CR.
I find it a good action movie but this is not enogh for a 007 movie. I wonder, where the all the US$ 160.000.000 production money went into.
And after still digesting the movie, I am realizing, what kind of masterpiece CR was.
I will not see it again in the cinema.
I'll wait for the DVD and the following movie.
As a good friend from the UK said: Expect the worst.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I for one find no joy at all in being a lifelong Bond fan who is really bitterly disapointed by QOS, particularly after finding so much to enjoy in CR. Like most of us I have been eagerly following progress of this film & counting the days to it's release. It's true that late in the day I was finding some of the reports worrying (short run time, twice the action, Forsters comments re having to rush the cutting of the film to meet the deadline, terrible song...)
I was still was hoping that they could pull it off, and I also calibrated my expectations to account for CR setting the bar so high as QOS was unlkely to hit that kind of high spot, but could still have been a really good Bond Film.
Despite all that, QOS failed to even get close to my pragmatic and lowered expectations. This is not an ideological position, or the determined view of a gleeful 'slagger', there is no happiness in this but a real disapointment from a fan. I feel let down as it could have been great, and posting an honest view in no way compensates for that.
I really hope that you find more to enjoy than I could.
Tell me about it. I need reinforcements Loeff. It's like Dawn of the Dead on here. I'm completely surrounded and I'm down to my last box of ammo and a tennis racket from the sports department.
But not while watching the movie, sadly!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
that is a bit unfair..I didn't enjoy QOS but I don't think I deserve to be called a slagger..what do you want me to do lie?
On a second note, maybe I should create a separate post for every amazing piece of film making excellence that Quantum of Solace demonstrates to balance up the negativity that some seem to like to revel in.
It would be a very short post sadly.
Loeffs darling, you and I have always gotten on very well.. and we always will. So I feel like telling you that calling us slaggers is just uncalled for. I don't take delight in NOT enjoying Bond. At all. I actually don't like this situation at all, and I WISH I could see what I want on screen but I just don't see it. The reviews of CRITICS too (who all raved about CR) are in general very, very poor. These are critics, not fans. They don't take any delight in slamming anything down, they just do their job.
They put up an entire page on Corriere della Sera today, and this critic who raved about CR (though to be fair the main critic of the newspaper slammed CR, which surprised me as I agreed with every single word he had said
.The critic also goes on and says that Bond's relationship with alcohol is ridiculed in this movie (I think someone mentioned this in the long reviews and they were slammed for saying so) not to mention the Bond girl part (I won't say the rest as we don't give out spoilers here. And he concludes saying that too many classic fundamental elements of Bond that make him Bond are missing, and they need to bring those back. And that the references to scenes from the past that were real Bond moments (again I won't specify) only make the spectator long for the old Bond, seeing the comparison with this one.
Now the above are basically the gripes most of us have. And this is a critic, not a fan. And again, one who RAVED about CR. So I really don't think we're slammers. We're just people who didn't enjoy the movie, and/or people (like me) who not only don't enjoy the movie but also don't enjoy Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond in general
I've never had a problem, and I truly enjoy talking to both those who enjoy Craig's Bond and those who don't enjoy, but I have noticed this "trend" about QoS and I frankly think it is unfair. We have a right to dislike things or like things, and neither of the two "categories" should be insulted because they feel a certain way. We're disappointed fans who feel QoS doesn't deliver, not slammers having the time of their life.
And on a good note:
I KNEW I could count on you for Henry, Loeffs
Reading you two makes me feel like I'm watching Walther Matthau and Jack Lemmon...
sorry but he looks like a girly fashion model. far to pretty.
i will concede, tho, that what eon really needs is a mixture of brosnan and craig. the smooth and the rough. brosnan never convinces as tough enough,too tall and lanky IMO, but (after watching QOS for the 3rd time today) craig could do with a bit more refinement. perhaps eon will listen to the criticism and give us that next time. craig should smile and wink a bit more, and the tone should lighten a bit...
Actually I'm getting impatient for our American friends to see this film so they can put in their forepenneth... it will be strange their leafing thru all this backchat - reams of it- two weeks later. Then again, they've had an election to think about; guess that was another reason, surprisingly not mentioned, to delay the release in the US.
Roger Moore 1927-2017