Yeah i wasnt that impressed. They have taken a lot from the Bourne Ultimatium. It wasnt as good as Casino Royal, the plot was pretty thin and ill agree that i thought the villian was weak. I did however like Olga Kurylenko, and Daniel Craig was brilliant as usual. Overall its a good action movie, but not as good as Casino Royal, but still better than pierce brosnan movies.
Most noteably the second unit director, hence the action scenes being very, very similar.
The people who think Quantum of Solace isn't Bondian enough are really missing the point by a country mile.
TBH, I was expecting this organisation to turn out to be SPECTRE. But they've named it now. Its called Quantum. So it may be inteneded to the the modern SPECTRE, but I'm doubting we'll see Blofeld and kitty cat any time soon!
Still, I agree it is getting back to the good old Bond roots and I'm glad we've actually got a recurring enemy for Bond to fight. Makes it all the more interesting than just a one-off baddie who's dead by the end of the film.
i simply adore CR (and watched it again last night), so i went to QoS with some hope .....
SPOILERS AHEAD SO TAKE CARE
*sharp intake of breath*
the running time was TOO cut back, they were trying to cut off the fat, but ended up cuttung some of the meat off as well! another TEN MINUTES ADDED would have filled in nicely about why bond went back to mathis, toned out the starter car chase ..... and general added other synopsis storypoints
gemma arteton's character ..... WHY? she felt totally superflous and added virtually NOTHING to anything of the film ..... even her "oops i've tripped you up" bit was completely flat and pointless!! and it's a pity they had to waste such a great death scene on her ..... that should have went to MATHIS IMO
the "feel" of the movie ..... IT WAS EUROPEAN!!! that would do with the director, and some of the fast cutting was maybe too quick for some
the end fight ..... greene DOES NOT LOOK like someone who could fight ..... he ended up as some sort of angry short man, but to his credit he did put ferociousness into it! his end though was poetic justice LOL, but who put the two bullets into him?? and his henchmen were pretty much bodies in front of him, except his main one (the poor sap LOL). being put in that position, wating for bond to come round the corner ..... then getting blown the buggery! ..... EVEN IN A NECKBRACE TOO!!!! oh yeah, when you have been found out you DO NOT get up and leave your seats, leaving bond to happysnap your stupid faces!!!
and were QUANTUM tryin to turn bond against MI6? well, they should have been, as it was pretty obvious to them that he was going through them like a knife through hot butter! there was a touch of presumption about that, but it wasn't delevoped ..... and added to the slight confusion when bond was finally brought in by M
generally it didn't feel "right" IMO ..... there wasn't that much coheesiveness to the main storyline, and didn't hold together at all well, not even close to some of the worst bonds made!!!
BUT THERE WERE GOOD POINTS
the excellent chases, the carchase, the footchase, the boatchase, the planechase (very nicely started with quite a shock!) with a breathtaking freefall into one of the sinkholes and the final conflagration ..... all excellently choreographed
the brilliant entry into slate's house ..... silent, peacefull, ghostly ..... only the outside noise filtering through, and slate's death too ..... almost incidental in it's nature!
camille's storyline ..... a parallel with bond's, but with a more vicious streak through it, as her personal revenge didn't have the baggage of duty holding it down. it's rare to see that in a bond movie, and gives that extra dimension!
and once again little pastiches from previous movies ..... they are hard to find, but i counted two at least
to be honest, after the near perfect brilliance of CR, i'm trying to NOT say the D word ..... but it's getting close to it, and that upsets me a bit! i'll go and watch it again down the line, but this one is not the kind that would make me OBSESSED with it as casino royale did
and i am one of the few who actually LIKE the theme song, but maybe should have re-recorded the shorter version rather than edit it down
6 out of 10 for me, it just didn't grab me as casino royale did ..... add back in some exposition, jiggle some of the storyline and get rid of the superflous characters, and we'll get somewhere nearer what casino royale started out as!
and once again little pastiches from previous movies
More homages I'd say as they had context within the overall storyline & weren't just littered about like with the demented kleptomania of Di(r)e Another Day.
They should have put the last 2 minutes of the film set in Russia as the pre-title sequences then started from fresh.
The camera was way too close in all the action sequences and as such they were confusing and very disorientating. There was no pacing to the film as it just jumped from action sequence to action sequence. What the hell was the director doing thinking with the "Horse race" and "Tosca" chase/fight scenes??
To me it seems Forster wanted to make an art house film and NOT a Bond film.
All Forster managed to do IMO was turn Bond into a thug. The scene where he pushes a baddie off the rook (akin TSWLM) made me feel uncomfortable. Bond has not yet earned the right to be that ruthless. He is STILL making mistakes and therefore acting in such a way.
The whole character of Camile was a pointless. It added nothing to the film and actually seems to confuse the story even more.
Why did they do that to Mathis? They have wasted the only other character in the film that was actually enjoyable. Even the wonderful Dame Judi was getting on my nerves by appearing every few minutes.
Just wait for the Blu ray release and fast forward to the last chapter then look forward to Bond 23.
Was not a bad film though CR was a little better. I never thought id say this but there was TOO much action, which was too fast so i didnt really understand what was goin on half the time. However Craig was great and Judi Dench was as brilliant as always 7-8/10
Oh dear - I really wanted to like this, but came away very diasppointed. They seemed to have overlooked the plot in favour of a lot of action sequences. With CR I really liked the fact that we were getting away from the silliness and back to a realistic Bond, but there was very little that was realistic about this.
The villian was rubbish and Bond seemed to have turned into a psycho - I know he was out for revenge after Vesper, but the way that he seemed to be killing everyone remotely connected with Quantum rather than trying to unravel the organisation and go after the big guns just seemed silly. Fleming's Bond wouldn't have been so stupid - or at least he would have got information out of them before disposing of them.
I warmed to the first Bond girl, after we had her motivation explained - that could have come earlier. The second one was, as already mentioned above, absolutely pointless, just someone for him to shag. Bringing Mathis back also just seemed a desparate way to link it to Casino Royale.
I do like the idea of the Quantum organisation, and I thought it started well, with the double crossing agent. Just poorly thought out after that. Some very exciting action sequences though.
All in all - 6/10, must try harder. I expect better from Bond, this was almost back to Pierce Brosnan films (though sadly not Goldeneye)
Casino Royale promised so much. Here was a Bond that felt real; he felt pain, he made mistakes and most of all, he was about more than gadgets and paperthin plots. Bond was here at last, and we could happily forget the previous films as nothing more than cheesey films for a different generation.
Fast forward to Quantum of Solace.
From the very start we realise it's a different film. The opening car chase sequence is claustrophobic, filmed on Shake-o-vision that never takes a step back to reveal the geography or forwards to reveal the emotion and motive of the protagonists - it's pure action for action's sake and leaves the viewer dizzy and confused. Then we have the title sequence - possibly the worst in Bond history. I have no idea how that dirge by White and Keys was approved, but I concede that it is appropriate when you consider the rest of the film!
The villain had no motive, nor was he particularly scary. Bond was supposedly fixated on avenging the death of Vespa, yet he displayed no emotional backstory whatsoever. We neither emoted with his plight or cared what happened to him. As for the supporting cast... wtf? A russian playing a bolivian that wasn't explained until the last 10 minutes that left me continually asking "what's the russian connection with all this?". A rehashed character from the last film with no cohesive reason to be in the film.
Even the finale was terrible, with an implausible action sequence (yet again).
If you have to see the latest Bond, wait until it comes out on DVD. And if you loved Casino Royale and are waiting for the next episode of intelligent, emotional Bond - wait till the next one and start praying now.
If you have to see the latest Bond, wait until it comes out on DVD. And if you loved Casino Royale and are waiting for the next episode of intelligent, emotional Bond - wait till the next one and start praying now.
It's all there in the subtext, actually. Bond has a real story arc in this one - more so than in any other Bond film - and character development. But Forster asks that his audience does a little of the work and he doesn't spoonfeed us. This is a Bond movie made by adults at the top of their game for intelligent adults who don't need every i dotted and every t crossed. This is easily the best-directed Bond film of the series and on a definite par with On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Casino Royale. Splendid stuff.
They should have put the last 2 minutes of the film set in Russia as the pre-title sequences then started from fresh.
The camera was way too close in all the action sequences and as such they were confusing and very disorientating. There was no pacing to the film as it just jumped from action sequence to action sequence. What the hell was the director doing thinking with the "Horse race" and "Tosca" chase/fight scenes??
To me it seems Forster wanted to make an art house film and NOT a Bond film.
All Forster managed to do IMO was turn Bond into a thug. The scene where he pushes a baddie off the rook (akin TSWLM) made me feel uncomfortable. Bond has not yet earned the right to be that ruthless. He is STILL making mistakes and therefore acting in such a way.
The whole character of Camile was a pointless. It added nothing to the film and actually seems to confuse the story even more.
Why did they do that to Mathis? They have wasted the only other character in the film that was actually enjoyable. Even the wonderful Dame Judi was getting on my nerves by appearing every few minutes.
Just wait for the Blu ray release and fast forward to the last chapter then look forward to Bond 23.
i thought exactly the same about cutting away to the horse race and the opera
It was very difficult to work out where the adverts stopped and the film began.
Aston Martin, Ford (2 models), Coke Zero, Sony, Omega Watches, Range Rover, Virgin.
I believe that the movies downfall started with the theme tune, and because they didn't use the gunsight and blood opening until the end credits.
So many action scenes badly interwoven into a poor script and plot; no better really than an episode of Police Camera Action. If you walked in half way through the film you would be convinced it was a very poor Jason Bourne movie (just realised that Jason and James have the same initials - JB)
Why no reference to anything Bond?
Why not have made this into a 20 minute tag onto the end of Casino Royale, it was just a revenge movie, which was done better in Kill Bill 1 & 2.
It was not good, but as a die hard Bond fan I have to see it, accept it and add it to the collection of DVD's whenit is released.
Why not have made this into a 20 minute tag onto the end of Casino Royale, it was just a revenge movie, which was done better in Kill Bill 1 & 2.
It was not good, but as a die hard Bond fan I have to see it, accept it and add it to the collection of DVD's whenit is released.
My thoughts exactly!!
I was surprised to see the Universal Exports cover used again. They even used the cover name R. Sterling which bond used in TSWLM.
Just like DAD it is part of the Bond history, it;s just a shame that they wasted such a brilliant opportunity to cement Bond for the noughties and beyond.
Also as this film is set 1 hour after CR how the hell did they rebuild M's office so bloody quickly??? British builders working that quickly??? Now that IS fantasy!!!!
It's all there in the subtext, actually. Bond has a real story arc in this one - more so than in any other Bond film - and character development. But Forster asks that his audience does a little of the work and he doesn't spoonfeed us. This is a Bond movie made by adults at the top of their game for intelligent adults who don't need every i dotted and every t crossed. This is easily the best-directed Bond film of the series and on a definite par with On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Casino Royale. Splendid stuff.
OHMSS was similarly razzed on release & is now acknowledged as a classic by all but the die hard silly gadget brigade.
& you're right about the direction.
This is the first Bond film in eons which actually feels like it was edited.
Been to see it again today & the Tosca sequence in particular is brilliantly counterpointed.
It's all there in the subtext, actually. Bond has a real story arc in this one - more so than in any other Bond film - and character development. But Forster asks that his audience does a little of the work and he doesn't spoonfeed us. This is a Bond movie made by adults at the top of their game for intelligent adults who don't need every i dotted and every t crossed. This is easily the best-directed Bond film of the series and on a definite par with On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Casino Royale. Splendid stuff.
it isn't an intelligent film at all - bourne spremacy managed to get plot and character across during relentless action scenes, this didnt manage at all
it isn't an intelligent film at all - bourne spremacy managed to get plot and character across during relentless action scenes, this didnt manage at all
Forster relied on subtext to get the message across.
Maybe that was never going to fly with the multiplex crowd but Bond aficionados will thank him.
I've seen it twice already & can't wait to see it again.
Forster relied on subtext to get the message across.
Maybe that was never going to fly with the multiplex crowd but Bond aficionados will thank him.
I've seen it twice already & can't wait to see it again.
They don't make films for the bloody "Bond afficionados", they should make them for the benefit of the general public! You know, the majority of the film audience...
I enjoyed Quantum of Solace a lot, and actually felt it was a bit of a return to the globetrotting, high adrelanaline Bond style that I found a bit lacking in Casino Royale (which was very good by the way, but this was more Bond).
I think there's quite a quite arrogant tendencey nowadays to be patronising about everything which doesn't take itself incredibly, incredibly seriously. I'm not one of the people who bashed The Dark Knight and said that Batman should have George Clooney and nipples (it was also actually very, very funny in its own way), but when it comes to the Bond franchise I really do associate it with cackling megavillains hatching plans of world domination in hidden bases situated under volcanoes. And I think people today have gone so far up their own arse that they look down on anyone who enjoys a bit of escapist fun.
People say that Casino Royale was closer to Fleming's vision, but surely the film franchise has become a different entity to the original novels by now?
The two Daniel Craig films are good, solid films, but I do wish that they could be a bit more fun. And I'm not ashamed to say that even if people are going to accuse me of being stuck in the past and missing the point.
They don't make films for the bloody "Bond afficionados", they should make them for the benefit of the general public! You know, the majority of the film audience...
That would mean a never ending diet of death rays & invisible cars.
Personally I'm glad those days seem to be over & the Brosnan era viewed as a false dawn.
Comments
Nope, not Spectre, Quantum, hence the film's title and lack of white cats sitting on baddies laps;) .
Most noteably the second unit director, hence the action scenes being very, very similar.
TBH, I was expecting this organisation to turn out to be SPECTRE. But they've named it now. Its called Quantum. So it may be inteneded to the the modern SPECTRE, but I'm doubting we'll see Blofeld and kitty cat any time soon!
Still, I agree it is getting back to the good old Bond roots and I'm glad we've actually got a recurring enemy for Bond to fight. Makes it all the more interesting than just a one-off baddie who's dead by the end of the film.
The name may be different but it's SPECTRE re-vamped for the 21st century.
Brilliant job they did of it too as after Austin Powers the old SPECTRE of volcano lairs & white cats would have been laughed off screen.
I don't think they could have named it SPECTRE without getting Kevin McClory's knickers in a twist, either!
I thought he died recently.
& I'm sure he signed over his rights to Sony before his demise.
SPOILERS AHEAD SO TAKE CARE
*sharp intake of breath*
the running time was TOO cut back, they were trying to cut off the fat, but ended up cuttung some of the meat off as well! another TEN MINUTES ADDED would have filled in nicely about why bond went back to mathis, toned out the starter car chase ..... and general added other synopsis storypoints
gemma arteton's character ..... WHY? she felt totally superflous and added virtually NOTHING to anything of the film ..... even her "oops i've tripped you up" bit was completely flat and pointless!! and it's a pity they had to waste such a great death scene on her ..... that should have went to MATHIS IMO
the "feel" of the movie ..... IT WAS EUROPEAN!!! that would do with the director, and some of the fast cutting was maybe too quick for some
the end fight ..... greene DOES NOT LOOK like someone who could fight ..... he ended up as some sort of angry short man, but to his credit he did put ferociousness into it! his end though was poetic justice LOL, but who put the two bullets into him?? and his henchmen were pretty much bodies in front of him, except his main one (the poor sap LOL). being put in that position, wating for bond to come round the corner ..... then getting blown the buggery! ..... EVEN IN A NECKBRACE TOO!!!! oh yeah, when you have been found out you DO NOT get up and leave your seats, leaving bond to happysnap your stupid faces!!!
and were QUANTUM tryin to turn bond against MI6? well, they should have been, as it was pretty obvious to them that he was going through them like a knife through hot butter! there was a touch of presumption about that, but it wasn't delevoped ..... and added to the slight confusion when bond was finally brought in by M
generally it didn't feel "right" IMO ..... there wasn't that much coheesiveness to the main storyline, and didn't hold together at all well, not even close to some of the worst bonds made!!!
BUT THERE WERE GOOD POINTS
the excellent chases, the carchase, the footchase, the boatchase, the planechase (very nicely started with quite a shock!) with a breathtaking freefall into one of the sinkholes and the final conflagration ..... all excellently choreographed
the brilliant entry into slate's house ..... silent, peacefull, ghostly ..... only the outside noise filtering through, and slate's death too ..... almost incidental in it's nature!
camille's storyline ..... a parallel with bond's, but with a more vicious streak through it, as her personal revenge didn't have the baggage of duty holding it down. it's rare to see that in a bond movie, and gives that extra dimension!
and once again little pastiches from previous movies ..... they are hard to find, but i counted two at least
to be honest, after the near perfect brilliance of CR, i'm trying to NOT say the D word ..... but it's getting close to it, and that upsets me a bit! i'll go and watch it again down the line, but this one is not the kind that would make me OBSESSED with it as casino royale did
and i am one of the few who actually LIKE the theme song, but maybe should have re-recorded the shorter version rather than edit it down
6 out of 10 for me, it just didn't grab me as casino royale did ..... add back in some exposition, jiggle some of the storyline and get rid of the superflous characters, and we'll get somewhere nearer what casino royale started out as!
More homages I'd say as they had context within the overall storyline & weren't just littered about like with the demented kleptomania of Di(r)e Another Day.
They should have put the last 2 minutes of the film set in Russia as the pre-title sequences then started from fresh.
The camera was way too close in all the action sequences and as such they were confusing and very disorientating. There was no pacing to the film as it just jumped from action sequence to action sequence. What the hell was the director doing thinking with the "Horse race" and "Tosca" chase/fight scenes??
To me it seems Forster wanted to make an art house film and NOT a Bond film.
All Forster managed to do IMO was turn Bond into a thug. The scene where he pushes a baddie off the rook (akin TSWLM) made me feel uncomfortable. Bond has not yet earned the right to be that ruthless. He is STILL making mistakes and therefore acting in such a way.
The whole character of Camile was a pointless. It added nothing to the film and actually seems to confuse the story even more.
Why did they do that to Mathis? They have wasted the only other character in the film that was actually enjoyable. Even the wonderful Dame Judi was getting on my nerves by appearing every few minutes.
Just wait for the Blu ray release and fast forward to the last chapter then look forward to Bond 23.
The villian was rubbish and Bond seemed to have turned into a psycho - I know he was out for revenge after Vesper, but the way that he seemed to be killing everyone remotely connected with Quantum rather than trying to unravel the organisation and go after the big guns just seemed silly. Fleming's Bond wouldn't have been so stupid - or at least he would have got information out of them before disposing of them.
I warmed to the first Bond girl, after we had her motivation explained - that could have come earlier. The second one was, as already mentioned above, absolutely pointless, just someone for him to shag. Bringing Mathis back also just seemed a desparate way to link it to Casino Royale.
I do like the idea of the Quantum organisation, and I thought it started well, with the double crossing agent. Just poorly thought out after that. Some very exciting action sequences though.
All in all - 6/10, must try harder. I expect better from Bond, this was almost back to Pierce Brosnan films (though sadly not Goldeneye)
Casino Royale promised so much. Here was a Bond that felt real; he felt pain, he made mistakes and most of all, he was about more than gadgets and paperthin plots. Bond was here at last, and we could happily forget the previous films as nothing more than cheesey films for a different generation.
Fast forward to Quantum of Solace.
From the very start we realise it's a different film. The opening car chase sequence is claustrophobic, filmed on Shake-o-vision that never takes a step back to reveal the geography or forwards to reveal the emotion and motive of the protagonists - it's pure action for action's sake and leaves the viewer dizzy and confused. Then we have the title sequence - possibly the worst in Bond history. I have no idea how that dirge by White and Keys was approved, but I concede that it is appropriate when you consider the rest of the film!
The villain had no motive, nor was he particularly scary. Bond was supposedly fixated on avenging the death of Vespa, yet he displayed no emotional backstory whatsoever. We neither emoted with his plight or cared what happened to him. As for the supporting cast... wtf? A russian playing a bolivian that wasn't explained until the last 10 minutes that left me continually asking "what's the russian connection with all this?". A rehashed character from the last film with no cohesive reason to be in the film.
Even the finale was terrible, with an implausible action sequence (yet again).
If you have to see the latest Bond, wait until it comes out on DVD. And if you loved Casino Royale and are waiting for the next episode of intelligent, emotional Bond - wait till the next one and start praying now.
2/10 (and that's being generous)
It's all there in the subtext, actually. Bond has a real story arc in this one - more so than in any other Bond film - and character development. But Forster asks that his audience does a little of the work and he doesn't spoonfeed us. This is a Bond movie made by adults at the top of their game for intelligent adults who don't need every i dotted and every t crossed. This is easily the best-directed Bond film of the series and on a definite par with On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Casino Royale. Splendid stuff.
i thought exactly the same about cutting away to the horse race and the opera
I would go to the cinema and see it, but it's too short a film and too expensive a day out.
Aston Martin, Ford (2 models), Coke Zero, Sony, Omega Watches, Range Rover, Virgin.
I believe that the movies downfall started with the theme tune, and because they didn't use the gunsight and blood opening until the end credits.
So many action scenes badly interwoven into a poor script and plot; no better really than an episode of Police Camera Action. If you walked in half way through the film you would be convinced it was a very poor Jason Bourne movie (just realised that Jason and James have the same initials - JB)
Why no reference to anything Bond?
Why not have made this into a 20 minute tag onto the end of Casino Royale, it was just a revenge movie, which was done better in Kill Bill 1 & 2.
It was not good, but as a die hard Bond fan I have to see it, accept it and add it to the collection of DVD's whenit is released.
My thoughts exactly!!
I was surprised to see the Universal Exports cover used again. They even used the cover name R. Sterling which bond used in TSWLM.
Just like DAD it is part of the Bond history, it;s just a shame that they wasted such a brilliant opportunity to cement Bond for the noughties and beyond.
OHMSS was similarly razzed on release & is now acknowledged as a classic by all but the die hard silly gadget brigade.
& you're right about the direction.
This is the first Bond film in eons which actually feels like it was edited.
Been to see it again today & the Tosca sequence in particular is brilliantly counterpointed.
it isn't an intelligent film at all - bourne spremacy managed to get plot and character across during relentless action scenes, this didnt manage at all
Forster relied on subtext to get the message across.
Maybe that was never going to fly with the multiplex crowd but Bond aficionados will thank him.
I've seen it twice already & can't wait to see it again.
They don't make films for the bloody "Bond afficionados", they should make them for the benefit of the general public! You know, the majority of the film audience...
I enjoyed Quantum of Solace a lot, and actually felt it was a bit of a return to the globetrotting, high adrelanaline Bond style that I found a bit lacking in Casino Royale (which was very good by the way, but this was more Bond).
I think there's quite a quite arrogant tendencey nowadays to be patronising about everything which doesn't take itself incredibly, incredibly seriously. I'm not one of the people who bashed The Dark Knight and said that Batman should have George Clooney and nipples (it was also actually very, very funny in its own way), but when it comes to the Bond franchise I really do associate it with cackling megavillains hatching plans of world domination in hidden bases situated under volcanoes. And I think people today have gone so far up their own arse that they look down on anyone who enjoys a bit of escapist fun.
People say that Casino Royale was closer to Fleming's vision, but surely the film franchise has become a different entity to the original novels by now?
The two Daniel Craig films are good, solid films, but I do wish that they could be a bit more fun. And I'm not ashamed to say that even if people are going to accuse me of being stuck in the past and missing the point.
That would mean a never ending diet of death rays & invisible cars.
Personally I'm glad those days seem to be over & the Brosnan era viewed as a false dawn.
Really?
For the benefit of those of us who clearly missed the message, what was it?
(Because otherwise I'll keep pointing out the Emperor is naked)
For starters there's the much criticised Tosca sequence where an opera about doomed love & espionage is cleverly counterpointed with on screen events.
I could go on but to paraphrase Mr White "Quantum of Solace isn't for everyone.
Strawman.
Did I ever say they should mimic Die Another Day? Or perhaps I was referring to the likes of The Spy Who Loved Me, Goldeneye and You Only Live Twice.
And I really liked the opera scene by the way.