Bolt
boogie woogie feng shui
... it's also the only one out of two. So now I'm wondering, when you made that remark, what point exactly were you trying to convey? :laugh:
Quantum of Solace 007 - Talkback
- Thread starter Lustful Butchery
- Start date
... it's also the only one out of two. So now I'm wondering, when you made that remark, what point exactly were you trying to convey? :laugh:
Bolt
boogie woogie feng shui
Apologies for the double post; I thought I'd offer my thoughts on the film:
It's pretty bad when a movie starts and you immediately have no idea what's going on. I was pretty nervous about the quality of the action, as some guys on a martial arts/action filmmaking forum I post on had been criticizing it pretty harshly, and as far as the car chase went, it was justified. I really couldn't tell you what happened in that scene, most of the time it was just flying colors and shapes. The foot chase in Italy, also, was remarkably incoherent, although by the time it reached the rooftops it was a little better. After that, most of the action was enjoyable, with the fight in the apartment being the highlight of the film, although I think the finale was a bit of a letdown. Most curious to me was the fact that the plotline, while not particularly extravagent, was so convoluted that I still couldn't follow it with any kind of success. A lot of characters just seemed thrown in; Olga Kurylenko's character especially was useless except as eye candy. Loved the Goldfinger reference. Villain was bland and unremarkable. One of the worst theme songs/opening credit sequences in 007 history, shame on Jack White and Alicia Keys (in general, but especially for that "song"). What bothered me the most about the film, besides how terribly written some of the dialogue was, was the fact that Bond seemed to repeatedly break character for the purpose of amusement. There was no reason for him to kill every person that he was involved in an altercation or even came in contact with, and scenes like him dispatching the motorcycle thug in Haiti seemed completely out of left field and unnecessary. I realize they were to make the audience laugh, but they didn't make any sense, and I think pandering to the audience is the main thing that made this film unlikeable. It felt like Casino Royale, just without the bite and with more emphasis on pleasing your typical, braindead, popcorn movie-goer. 6.5/10 until I see it again to fully make up my mind.
One great thing about Quantum of Solace was that the hype was enough to get me to rewatch Dr. No, From Russia With Love, and Goldfinger. FANTASTIC movies! Woohoo!
It's pretty bad when a movie starts and you immediately have no idea what's going on. I was pretty nervous about the quality of the action, as some guys on a martial arts/action filmmaking forum I post on had been criticizing it pretty harshly, and as far as the car chase went, it was justified. I really couldn't tell you what happened in that scene, most of the time it was just flying colors and shapes. The foot chase in Italy, also, was remarkably incoherent, although by the time it reached the rooftops it was a little better. After that, most of the action was enjoyable, with the fight in the apartment being the highlight of the film, although I think the finale was a bit of a letdown. Most curious to me was the fact that the plotline, while not particularly extravagent, was so convoluted that I still couldn't follow it with any kind of success. A lot of characters just seemed thrown in; Olga Kurylenko's character especially was useless except as eye candy. Loved the Goldfinger reference. Villain was bland and unremarkable. One of the worst theme songs/opening credit sequences in 007 history, shame on Jack White and Alicia Keys (in general, but especially for that "song"). What bothered me the most about the film, besides how terribly written some of the dialogue was, was the fact that Bond seemed to repeatedly break character for the purpose of amusement. There was no reason for him to kill every person that he was involved in an altercation or even came in contact with, and scenes like him dispatching the motorcycle thug in Haiti seemed completely out of left field and unnecessary. I realize they were to make the audience laugh, but they didn't make any sense, and I think pandering to the audience is the main thing that made this film unlikeable. It felt like Casino Royale, just without the bite and with more emphasis on pleasing your typical, braindead, popcorn movie-goer. 6.5/10 until I see it again to fully make up my mind.
One great thing about Quantum of Solace was that the hype was enough to get me to rewatch Dr. No, From Russia With Love, and Goldfinger. FANTASTIC movies! Woohoo!
KingRanger
Banned
I just rewatched my favorite Bond movie ever, A view to a kill.
Shougo B'Stard
Would like to change his avatar
As much as I'm a fan of Fleming, those early Connery films, Lazenby, and Dalton, I still think Roger Moore's under appreciated in the Bond fandom. That was the course the movies were going to take with or without Moore, as you can see in Diamonds Are Forever -- the point where the character became James Bond the myth, rather than James Bond the man. And he was a good match for that and worked for the time, and he does have good moments.
And Moore's never really given enough credit as an actor. I feel that he at least delivers a consistent performance. Despite the quality of the movie, Moore's always doing his best with it. Whereas you can tell the exact moment where Connery's fed up with the role (it happens about midway through Thunderball, and is never more obvious than in Diamonds Are Forever). And Brosnan started phoning it in after GoldenEye (but I think he was dissatisfied with the scripts after that).
And we can all thank Moore that James Brolin didn't get to play 007.
And Moore's never really given enough credit as an actor. I feel that he at least delivers a consistent performance. Despite the quality of the movie, Moore's always doing his best with it. Whereas you can tell the exact moment where Connery's fed up with the role (it happens about midway through Thunderball, and is never more obvious than in Diamonds Are Forever). And Brosnan started phoning it in after GoldenEye (but I think he was dissatisfied with the scripts after that).
And we can all thank Moore that James Brolin didn't get to play 007.
VengeanceGOD
WIIIIIIIIIIII!
I'd gone into this expecting another bleak, depressing bore-fest like Casino Royale. Quantum of Solace gets a higher score from me just because it was at least trying to be a Bond film. Not a great one, but a Bond film nonetheless.
Bolt
boogie woogie feng shui
I'm not knocking on Roger Moore's acting ability, and I know that it's not his fault that the movies began to degenerate into corn-flavored cheese during his reign, but I think there were just a number of factors that kept him from being right for the role. The dude was more like a librarian than a special agent; he wasn't particularly charming, he couldn't handle the action well, he didn't really have the right look, and (though I usually hate to make this kind of accusation) I think he was just too darn old. Connery was getting up there by the end of his stint, but he always had a youthful vigor in the way he looked and moved that offset his graying hair and softening physique.
I am truly perplexed by observations like that. "Bleak and depressing" I can maybe almost see (I just think of it as more mature and less one-dimensional in dealing with the expression of Bond's emotions), but how anyone would think Casino Royale was boring I simply cannot comprehend. The movie was packed with action, both in the actual physical scenes themselves and in the tension of the card games and twists in the plot, the acting (something that felt like it was taken a lot less seriously in Quantum) was aces all around, the locations and setpieces were great, and there was even enough class and witicisms to appeal to classic Bond fans. But a lot of haters just zero in on the fact that Bond was a big angry meany pants and didn't spend the entire 120 minutes sipping martinis and making snide comments about womens' wardrobe choices. And that was fine with me, I like hardass Bond. Connery was on-and-off hardass Bond. Dalton was hardass Bond. Even Brosnan in Goldeneye stomped some **** in; I value 007's ability to stay cool under fire and always rise to the top in dangerous scenarios more than I do his tuxedo measurements. Quantum may have felt more like what you consider a Bond movie (although I think it felt more like an unfortunate Bourne impersonator), but to say that Casino Royale didn't stay true to the nature of the character or some jazz like that is just untrue and probably uninformed.
I am truly perplexed by observations like that. "Bleak and depressing" I can maybe almost see (I just think of it as more mature and less one-dimensional in dealing with the expression of Bond's emotions), but how anyone would think Casino Royale was boring I simply cannot comprehend. The movie was packed with action, both in the actual physical scenes themselves and in the tension of the card games and twists in the plot, the acting (something that felt like it was taken a lot less seriously in Quantum) was aces all around, the locations and setpieces were great, and there was even enough class and witicisms to appeal to classic Bond fans. But a lot of haters just zero in on the fact that Bond was a big angry meany pants and didn't spend the entire 120 minutes sipping martinis and making snide comments about womens' wardrobe choices. And that was fine with me, I like hardass Bond. Connery was on-and-off hardass Bond. Dalton was hardass Bond. Even Brosnan in Goldeneye stomped some **** in; I value 007's ability to stay cool under fire and always rise to the top in dangerous scenarios more than I do his tuxedo measurements. Quantum may have felt more like what you consider a Bond movie (although I think it felt more like an unfortunate Bourne impersonator), but to say that Casino Royale didn't stay true to the nature of the character or some jazz like that is just untrue and probably uninformed.
Shougo B'Stard
Would like to change his avatar
That's a common complaint about Moore. I just keep in mind that Fleming had championed David Niven for the role, and Moore's an absolute badass street brawler compared to Niven.
KingRanger
Banned
I saw it last night, and It was great. The people saying it's not "bond" just IMO, have no clue about Bond in the first place. The only real valid complaint I have heard from people is about the classic Bond Humor, but again IMO that would have ruined the feel for this movie. This was about Bond getting revenge and learning more about himself.
I found the action very well done. The acting was very good, and the locations were excellent. I didn't care for the opening song, but I am not an Alicia Keys fan.
I found the action very well done. The acting was very good, and the locations were excellent. I didn't care for the opening song, but I am not an Alicia Keys fan.
VengeanceGOD
WIIIIIIIIIIII!
Disagree all around. The best Bond, as we've discussed is Connery. If you watch his movies, he seems to be enjoying himself the entire time - to me, that's the essential nature of James Bond. If you have a guy who hates everyone, especially himself, then it's not Bond, it's another emo action star and we have too many of those already. Sure he's a killer, and he's brutal, but he's not a brainless thug and at least Quantum tried to show that a little. In Casino Royale he needed constant hand holding from M, Felix, and Vesper to accomplish anything beyond punching a guy.
Secondly, Casino Royale was faaaar too interested in shitting all over it's own subject material. "Shaken or stirred?" "Do I look like I give a damn?" That's a line you put in a movie that's competing with James Bond or a parody of James Bond, not a movie about James Bond. If you don't want to include an aspect of the series, don't include it. But don't **** on the fans who actually liked the old films, either.
I'm not entirely sure how you consider scowling at the camera for two hours "acting", or where you found even a tiny bit of class inside Craig's take on Bond, but neither were there. So I guess you're "uninformed."
As for the boring comment, I stand by it. The chase sequence at the beginning was interesting, and some of the fights in the middle were exciting, too. The card games were terribly put together and edited. There was no pacing. A single hand was dealt, and Bond lost, three different times. This is after hyping him up as the greatest card player in M16's employ, and he looked like a doofus. Then, after the card games, in fact after the movie is over, Bond spends another twenty minutes in the most implausibly pasted on character motivation following a girl to Venice just so she can kill herself. Why? At that point in the movie they hadn't done anything to make me care about either character, so the idea of feeling bad for them about this never even crossed my mind. The idea of walking out of the theater, however...
And please, please don't come at me with the silly "It's closer to the books" argument I've been getting for the two years since the movie came out. I've read Ian Fleming's novels. I enjoyed them for the same reasons I enjoyed the films. Bond in the novels is a little less sure of himself, but that's about it. He doesn't have any of the poor character traits that Craig's Bond displayed in Royale.
Now, again, I'm not saying Quantum is a good movie. The plot is confusing and badly written, especially the bad guy's evil plan. Most of the characters are underdeveloped. But it at least felt like a bad Bond movie, as opposed to a poorly put together Bourne film.
