Quantum Of Solace=Casino Royale 2? (Page 1 of 2)

I like to see CR and QoS back to back as a 4 hour complete bond experience.
When you look at QoS as just a big action finale to CR its not half bad.

I know on seeing it the Phrase " Number 2" did spring to mind 

whilst it is indeed a stretch to suggest that we can merit the film as an 'expansion pack' of sorts to CR, when watching the films back to back, there is a sense that QoS makes quite an effective 'third act' to the story. Intentional or not, this doesn't stop the film from being a lousy entity on its own...

I don't find QoS one of the worst Bond films by a long shot, but it certainly is not among the best, either.  I think the problem is it's a close out on the Vesper relationship and as such carries a lot of baggage that works against it.  I do feel it makes the point that the closer they stick to the original Fleming storylines the better the Bond films seem to be.

Come off it Sir Miles, a high box office take counts for not much, many go in and see it once simply because they liked its predecessor, CR. To be a big hit, you just have to get everyone in to see it once,  they pay the same whether they liked it or not.

I'd argue CR was a success because of adhering to Fleming's writing, QoS represented a failure of nerve.

I recently read on another forum that M forster has given an Interview stating that QOS didn't turn out the way he wanted, Glad he's come round to my way of thinking.

Box office is an indicator of how the general public reacts to a film.  It is not without faults as some very good films are not widely received or even distributed.  But it does indicate how the larger group reacts to a given product.  In the final analysis, even though we have great fun arguing the finer points, on an individual basis, only the viewers personal preferences are relevant, and no more right or wrong then the next fellows.  Think of box office as sociology and an individual review as psychology, group behavior vs individual behavior.

Nap, I expected far better from you....

A high box office take does count for a lot....and you know damn well it does....if the first Bond film hadn't done well at the box office, then there wouldn't have been a second...let alone another 21 !

And trying to get everyone in to see it once is easy You ask the makers of Green Lantern how they managed to get everyone in to see it once...oh no, you can't...because they didn't ! Perhaps not as easy as you think, eh ?

You really think the entire box office for QoS didn't include repeat business...???....and if the film was really THAT bad then word-of-mouth alone would have adversely affected the box office take....and it didn't....

Come on Nap - despite what people say - you ARE better than that

To me whether a film is a financial success or not is not part of the equation of its quality.   Its a question of whether I think its good or not. Narratively and technically.  Although repeat viewings was not something I understood until I realised I saw CR 6 times at the cinema - simply because I had the option and loved watching it on the big screen.  By and large, Modern tv and film has shown high rating figures and quality do not often go hand in hand. - But high ratings means money, so we get more of the same. Look at reality tv!

QoS is the first Bond film I did not enjoy,  because the flash editing literally hurt my eyes. - I saw it twice at the cinema, and in spite of everyone's good intentions (except the director who simply made an arty-farty mess) it just didn't work.  - My take on its technical flaws.
  The only saving grace for me WERE the scenes that touched upon CR - specifically, the initial portion of White's torture (when he realises MI6 are in the dark,) Bond and Mathias in Italy and later on the plane while Bond gets blotto (Dave Arnold's music helps here) and the final scene when Bond finishes speaking with M,and walks away dropping Vesper's love knot in the snow.  -  Certainly this film is not part two of Casino Royale, it is a film entry by itself.  Trouble is, it did not do a decent enough job of establishing that.  - To me, resolving Vesper's storyline left over from CR, is its only positive legacy.  On the down side it creates the impression its a straight carry on of that story. 

  As a villain Greene is uninteresting, we learn nothing about Quantum worth knowing, the plot is too cryptic and complicated, Bond himself is out of character -  a rebellious, cold  killing machine, with M in the wings looking over his shoulder at every turn. (and location?!) The lack of any humour.  - Not to mention gratuitous hit you on the head references to the previous films in the franchise. Dr No style  dinner suit, Goldfinger death by body coating, even Quantum itself seems to be an ill defined  shadow reprise of Spectre for the reboot era! Etc etc.   - These ingredients a good Bond film do NOT make.   - To me these are the  Narrative flaws.  Bond films should be setting standards for others to follow, not falling back on history, and also running on the spot!

I'd be the first to say the Bond films have ebbed and weaved over the decades. That's why the film series is still with us. - Compare the elements of Dr No with OHMSS, Moonraker, TWINE, and CR and you have films that are radically different in style and content. But for me, QoS is the first where I can say I went to see a Bond film at the cinema and came out confused and very disappointed.

    - Twice.

Last edited by Thunderbird 2 (19th Jul 2011 21:18)

C'mon Sir Miles, you're going mad. It's as bad as highhopes in his darkest hour.

On that basis, TB is the best Bond movie hands down if  you look at another thread based on admissions, it's streets ahead. Now I like TB, but its success is down to Bond fever and how brilliant GF was. Green Lantern didn't work because nobody got the concept or the franchise and it has no built-in audience, unlike Bond. And it got bad reviews. It is easy to get people in once to see a movie, if you have brand loyalty and a gimmick of sorts, or the last one in the series was good. (I'm thinking Spidey 3, or any of the Star Wars prequels) All which applied to QoS. For QoS to fail, it would have to have worked hard indeed.

Really don't want to get into a spat with you, and my ' beneath you ' comment was intended asa compliment rather than a put down as I felt it fell short of your normally high standard of argument. It smacked of pique that's all, no offence intended. Of course Box office matters' but on the back of such a high profile success as CR QOS was almost bomb proof, despite at best mixed critical and fan reaction. I think 23 could suffer if early notices and vibes are anything less than euphoric. Personally I have a really good feeling about 23. There have been mutterings that EON, DC, & Forster have misgivings re the way QOS Panned out despite and not because of it's box office take. Maybe I should have elaborated along those lines in my earlier post so as not to cause offence. The great joy of this virtual space for me is the fact that we can and do debate so passionately about something that most of the world regards as fluff.

So, bygones?

Oh I learned very quickly the only person who is qualified to critique a film (or any other art / media form) - is that individual themselves. Professional critics are just paid because they are very good at spouting what THEY think in professional terms!  None of us are any different, except we have integrity - because we are not part of the press machine!

You will have to forgive me M -  but although at the cinema I cringed at DAD, and only saw it at the cinema once, I have seen it on tv a few times and yes, I prefer it to QoS!  DAD is over the top, far too much tech, Toby Stevens (poor man) is questionable casting as Graves, the film has a risible ending, - but its the Brosnan version of Diamonds or Moonraker.  Not the best, but still watchable and in places quite enjoyable.  -  Plus Rosa Pike is entertaining as Frost!  - The DVD commentary by Brosnan and Pike is entertaining and thoughtful.

As an aside, I agree with your Marmite analogy for QoS.  Can't help but wonder how much money it made from all that product placement?  - I wouldn't mind as much if I actually liked Sony phones, or Tom Ford suits!