Bond phones up Blofeld and tells him he's shagged his granddaughter
That's rather odd...if that's true, how does it fit into QOS?
Bond investigates a strange death cult called The Satanic ****s, headed by Blofeld's granddaughter. He bangs her, then goes through her contacts book to find Blofeld, who is holed up in Torquay, a British seaside resort.
Don't get me wrong---I'm sure many critics are lovely people (despite the ubiquitous lack of supporting evidence 8-) )---but sometimes it's good to see an articulate James Bond Fan (who isn't necessarily looking to score points by hinting at how superior he is to the material at hand) review a James Bond Film...Beware spoilers! (You Have Been Warned) :v
My most sincere congratulations to Zorin Industries {[]
It is very nicely written, and something I would use as an example to students wishing to critically evaluate.
Ive read a fair smattering of reviews and, although I do reserve final judgement until I have seen the film myself, I am a little concerned that most reviewers mention:
the lack of humour,
the never ending explosions,
the revenge obsessed Bond,
the lack of any romance,
but all wrapped up in a good looking package that ticks all the boxes without showing any great insight.
Hmmm sounds a bit like DAD, God forbid.
I'm really concerned that Purvis and Wade can't seem to write a decent script unless it features multiple explosions and special effects (okay CR was a good effort, with strings attatched) It reminds me of the Tom Mankiewicz days....
I've only just read Graham Rye's review for the first time, avoiding it before seeing the film for fear of spoilers. I hate to agree with him, but the vast bulk of his comments are absolutely spot on the money. I wouldn't be so harsh as to give it 1/10, but it certainly ranks rather low on the scale, probably around 4.5/10
Metro newspaper gives it four out of five while harping on about Bourne and saying that like The Dark Knight it's no one's idea of fun. Headline, 'The Spy Who Mugged Me'!
Derek Malcolm of the Standard gives it only two out of five, however London Lite had two reviews, one a bloke Paul Connolly who gives it five out of five, another a woman reviewer giving it just two.
I doubt Malcolm ever gave Roger Moore a decent review in his life, but it seems even he would love to see him again. I heard some punters discussing QoS as they left the cinema in Leicester Square. None were polite. "Bond is finished!" was one young man's response. It's doing brisk business as all the showings in LS and Tottenham Court Road were sold out, but I'm afraid word of mouth is already looking poor. Still, hopefully I'll get to make my mind up tomorrow.
I was lucky enough to see QOS at a charity premiere...or so I thought. How can anyone with a budget of £2 million end up with a finished product like this? I loved Casino Royale and consider myself to be a Bond fanatic but this film.... Firstly, no gun barrel sequence at the start of the film. Did Craig not earn this at the end of the last? The pre credit sequence is the worst ever, a badly edited car chase, trouble is you don't see anything, it's almost subliminal imaging. The theme tune, well enough said. Then the film then turns into Bourne 4. Characterisation is non existent. I can imagine the script writers sitting down to begin the creative process..." Let's have acar chase, then a boat chase, don't forget to put Bond on a motorbike, oh yeah and a plane. Locations, let's see... a desert, some coastline, a big hotel and oh yeah the plot." The film is plain boring, no bond theme till the end. In casino Royale this was done for a reason, Martin Campbell knew what he was doing. Craig is good and did not deserve such a poor script. If this had been his first film the critics would be baying with delight.I just feel cheated, another two years to wait until the next one. Please producers start with a good story and most importantly don't risk such a fantastic franchise on a director who hasn't a clue what he is doing.Ask the fans what they want to see, consumer research for free.This is destined to become the new Living Daylights or Octopussy and the sad thing is it will make millions, we will all buy the dvd,etc. Did I mention the villian? No... I've forgotten about him already.
I've only just read Graham Rye's review for the first time, avoiding it before seeing the film for fear of spoilers. I hate to agree with him, but the vast bulk of his comments are absolutely spot on the money. I wouldn't be so harsh as to give it 1/10, but it certainly ranks rather low on the scale, probably around 4.5/10
Yes, Graham is frighteningly spot-on, with his review
Further to my initial comments, I have just worked out the true villan of Quantum of Solace and he presents the greatest threat to Bond yet....his name.....Forster, Marc Forster. Did anyone see his comments on the Sky special " I wanted the action sequences to revolve around the four elements, fire,water,earth, air." Personally, I wanted the action sequences to revolve around a plot.
Forster, Marc Forster. Did anyone see his comments on the Sky special " I wanted the action sequences to revolve around the four elements, fire,water,earth, air." Personally, I wanted the action sequences to revolve around a plot.
)
{[]
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
A bit long...but well worth the time; great style and wit---I love this sort of thing.
Apparently it's not a James Bond film---at least, not the sort to which we've become accustomed.
My God. I can't wait to see it.
I know I said I wouldn't post here until I saw the film but...I'm ill, I tell you. Ill!
X-(
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 heard some punters discussing QoS as they left the cinema in Leicester Square. None were polite. "Bond is finished!" was one young man's response. It's doing brisk business as all the showings in LS and Tottenham Court Road were sold out, but I'm afraid word of mouth is already looking poor. Still, hopefully I'll get to make my mind up tomorrow.
I saw it at the Odeon LS, on the 31st, 12.50pm showing,
it looked about 2/3 full - which was good, considering that it's playing EVERYWHERE
Hundreds of people in there - and NOT ONE PERSON CLAPPED at the end of the movie (which audiences tend to in the West End - especially I find, at opening day screenings, as there's always plenty of "fans" in the audience, which there appeared to be on that day)
People clapped in the Odeon LS at the end of CR though - and there wasn't half as many people in there, on the opening day
Ok I went to see Quantum of Solace on Firday opening night...
And I have to admit ... an entertaining film pretty reasonable... but fairly poor compared to Casino Royale...
Just too many of the real Bond elements are missing and its not getting any better...
Desmond Llewelyn did say one thing in an interview that has always stuck in my head in regards to the Bond film formula.. ''If there was not a Q, there wouldn't have been a Bond''
and thats the bloody problem with QoS. there no gadgetery what so ever. at least in CR, there was the little torch flash bomb used by the airport terrorist and the medical equipment and silenced P99 build into the glove box of the Aston DBS. which kept the flavour of gadgets alive to some degree.
For me QoS is boarder line Jason Borne. and why the hell was Peter Lamont not on this film. the man's track record and acheivments makes him an essential key to the production. For me there was too many paralels with DIE ANOTHER DAY . firstly , that realy poor Parachute jump with Bond and Camilie, after all the effors in CR to make the stunts real and outstanding and fresh what do they do ,,, Lets use Pathetic, Fake CGI again, I know it ruined DAD but lets do it again. another parallel to DAD was the obvious previous Bond film referances which were un-nesesary here, the girl dead on the Bed covered in oil' GOLDFINGER its been done... Bond and the girl walking through the desert in smart dress, and Bond knocking the guy off the roof by hitting his arm off his tie / shirt again TSWLM... and other bits here and there.
Dominic Greene , a pathetic waste of a character. trying to look evil , same sort of cover as Gustav graves helping the planet idea , The diamond mine now Green Planet. also his sort of side-kick elvis another pointless waste of an actors wage, and look closely hardly speaks, not a hint of character , and he even looks and acts a little like Gustav Graves's technician side-kick ''Vlad'' who modifys his armour suit and mantains the icarus satalite. its getting a little old.
If Q dosent come back in the next film I am seriously considering boycotting it. and the character has to be played by a good actor such as Michael Gambon or John Scessions. someone of that nature.
I would give QoS a 6/10 where as CR was a 9/10
in CR the casino scenes were very enjoyable a lot of talking and character development. in QoS chase after chase after chase a bit of CGI and then another bloody chase and perhaps the odd explosion, more CGI and then a chase...
it may sound like i hate the film i dont it was worth watching , entertaining but it kills me that there going too far from the Bond formula and it was not a worthy sequal to CASINO ROYALE.
the only actual character development in QoS was that od Renie Mathis, a great character brilliantly played.. Judi Dench was on good form. Daniel was also pretty good not as good as CR but he saves the film to some degree.
Agent Feilds could have played a bigger role by far. Cammile a bit of a cheap Bond girl.. not the classy standards you expect from a Bond beauty. although very attractive, a character let down..
Lets hope Bond 23 'lIVE BY ONE RULE DIE BY ANOTHER' gets back to the traditional Bond.
Okay...I'm getting a bit confused between the different 'Qos Review' threads. I'm posting this here because I think this is the public reviews and not the AJB member reviews...
I found this review interesting since it gave a reason behind the delayed opening here in the U.S.
Here’s the truth about the latest James Bond movie, "Quantum of Solace." It’s not very good.
Quantum opened on Friday in London and Paris, and there was a reason. MGM and Sony were obviously scared that a highly negative reaction in the U.S. would scare off the rest of the world. So they went with Europe first, hoping for the best. In Paris, at least, Friday was a school holiday, meaning kids were flocking to theaters and malls anyway.
By coincidence, I was in Paris on Friday and went with a herd of 16-year-old boys and one 11-year-old, as well as one mother. It was a cold, rainy afternoon, and I had high hopes for a roller coaster ride full of explosions, inexplicable derrying do, some decent quips and memorable lines, even a smidgen of smarmy sex for James with a couple of babes.
What else do we look forward to in James Bond? Readings from Rilke? No. We want gadgets. And a great theme song. And a spectacular opening sequence.
The truth then: we got none of the above, except maybe the Rilke and deep frown lines. Marc Forster, one of our favorite directors from “Finding Neverland” and “Monster’s Ball” has turned James Bond 007 into a meditation on death and trust. He’s made the straight play version of what’s supposed to be a musical comedy.
Let’s start with the music. There couldn’t be a worse, more tuneless song than Alicia Keys’ and Jack White’s “Another Day to Die.” From Shirley Bass to Carly Simon, Paul McCartney, even Duran Duran or Sheena Easton, the people behind James Bond theme songs knew enough to match their pop hit to the original John Barry music, provide a bit of drama and suggest romance. Keys and White, brought in at the last minute to replace the ailing Amy Winehouse, just didn’t get it.
The song is a bad omen, because it follows the shortest, least interesting opening sequence in Bond history. Suffice to say, when it blends into the first notes of the Keys-White song, your first thought will be, That’s it? Yes, that’s it.
The solace James is seeking in quantum, I guess, is all about losing Vesper, the girlfriend from “Casino Royale.” All well and good, but James Bond doesn’t mourn on screen. Paul Haggis and the writers should have known, Bond got over it since we saw him last. The audience did, believe me. Instead we’re left with this problem. Few viewers will recall Eva Green’s Vesper. They won’t much go for the new Bond girls, neither of whom has name marquee value. How about as one of the girls Heidi Klum? Eva Mendes? Audrey Tatou? Olga Kurylenko and Gemma Arterton are fine, but taken together they aren’t special. They’re certainly no Halle Berry.
The secondary cast works well, especially Judi Dench as M, although there’s lots less of her. There’s no Q, and no one to introduce James to new gadgets (this in the time of new gadgets in the real world every hour and blogs galore devoted to them!). Mathieu Amalric is just great and looks right at Mr. Green, the new villain, but as in the whole of the film there’s not a lot of sly dialogue. The Daniel Craig version of Bond isn’t very articulate or quick verbally, hence neither are his opponents. All the parrying is gone.
Quantum of Solace had a huge opening in Britain on Friday — $8 million. We’ll see how it does between now and opening day in America on November 14th. Something tells me once the excitement wears down, the new James Bond is not going to be one of those that anyone wants to see over and over again. In the meantime, I found myself more shaken than stirred by this latest installment.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
...I found this review interesting since it gave a reason behind the delayed opening here in the U.S....
Bond 'Solace': First U.S. Review
Here’s the truth about the latest James Bond movie, "Quantum of Solace." It’s not very good.
Quantum opened on Friday in London and Paris, and there was a reason. MGM and Sony were obviously scared that a highly negative reaction in the U.S. would scare off the rest of the world. So they went with Europe first, hoping for the best.
...Forster presented his first cut to Eon in "late August" (unspecified beyond that here) and was still editing the film on 14th September...though he was complaining that he felt rushed during the editing process. For this theory to hold water, you have to believe that Eon was convinced---at that time---that another two or three weeks of editing (at least!) could not 'save' it.
Of course it's possible...but then that would allow for poisonous word-of-mouth to really 'sink in' over two weeks' time, and potentially cripple what might have otherwise been a huge opening in the States. Doesn't seem like the ideal strategy to maximize box office $$$$, though I'm certainly no authority on the matter.
I happen to think it's more likely that the reason given on 21st August---that they wanted to open a bit later to play into December for the holidays---is more likely. Reviews and fanboy reaction have been mixed, but it's a bit early to say (other than isolated anecdotals) how general audiences are reacting. Only time will tell if the film has legs, and ultimately box office will tell the story.
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
Here's the embodiment of a mixed review, from Lisa Schwarzbaum of Entertainment Weekly. Although she's very critical of the movie, she still gives it a grade of B, which is actually pretty good. Anyway. . .
Agent 007 (Daniel Craig) is a very mad man in Quantum of Solace, a cold and vengeful chapter in the James Bond saga with little interest in coherence, and even less in the kind of sensual pleasures and vicarious high-life thrills once anticipated from movies about Her Majesty's best-dressed secret service agent. A virtuoso action sequence is de rigueur at the start of any Bond film, of course. But the bullet-spraying car chase in Siena, Italy, that opens the 22nd edition — the second foray starring Craig as a Bond as bleak as his eyes are blue — is a Sunday drive compared with the intensity of the fury coming off that complicated British secret agent.
Quantum picks up more or less where Casino Royale left off two years ago. Stinging from his presumed betrayal by the late (alas) Vesper Lynd, the one babe Bond truly loved (adieu, sultry Eva Green!), 007 is hell-bent on uncovering the truth about QUANTUM, the maxi-secret international organization that blackmailed her. Applying enhanced interrogation techniques to the Euro-creepy Mr. White (Jesper Christensen), who was reeled in at the end of the last picture, seems like a good place for Bond and his impeccable boss, M (divine Judi Dench, crisp and tart as a Granny Smith apple), to begin. But it's not long — it's instantly, actually, after the revelation of a mole in MI6 erupts into a gigantic glass-shattering, oof-and-wham, parkour-influenced action scramble — before we're relying on screen titles to update us on Bond's busy itinerary. First he's in London, reporting for a less-than-satisfactory performance review (M, egged on by the CIA, wonders whether her man is even-keeled enough for his job). Then he's in Haiti, crossing paths with a sleuthing beauty named Camille (Olga Kurylenko) while searching for a nefarious Monsieur Greene (Mathieu Amalric, both eyes wide open after The Diving Bell and the Butterfly), who's a QUANTUM baddie with plans to mess with global natural resources. Next he's in Austria, he's in South America, he's...well, with the biggest budget in Bond movie history, he's wherever the producers and director Marc Forster (Finding Neverland) want him to be.
The point is, wherever he is, this James Bond is ****ed. And that ceaseless anger begins to curdle every sequence that might otherwise bring a little happiness. I mean happiness for us, the viewers — whether we're watching a scene at an avant-garde opera, a seduction, or a showy action sequence shot in a smeary color palette of browns.
With his assumption of the role in 2006, Craig triumphantly announced that there's a new 007 in town. Through his very physicality, and through his fresh interpretation of James Bond as a potent man with little interest in the silly stuff of shaken-not-stirred rituals, the actor scoured the iconic character of plaque and mannerisms. But having created such a tiger, this dark fellow needs a suitable jungle in which to prowl.
I mean it as a cockeyed compliment to the reborn Bond franchise, then, when I say that Quantum of Solace is an unnecessarily cramped arena for such an interesting cat. Bond chases Greene with grim determination (Amalric himself is a villain of mild physical proportions, with flourishes of evil limited to a glittering hardness in the eyes). But 007 turns that same ray-gun attitude of mirthlessness on practical conversations with Camille (the beauty doesn't have time for bedroom thoughts since she's plotting a vendetta against a South American baddie of her own); on office updates with M; and on intelligence gathered from the wily CIA agent Felix Leiter (as played by Jeffrey Wright, the coolest cat in the story). Working with a screenplay by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, and Paul Haggis, Forster (the German-Swiss director who titrated the chemistry between Billy Bob Thornton and Halle Berry in Monster's Ball) offers little cinematic distinction between scenes of rage, jet lag, and the drinking of those iconic cocktails.
I have a feeling, or at least a wish, that in the next Bond picture — Craig's committed to two more — this 21st-century spy will gain greater access to his own character strengths; I hope the director will allow his star to play. For now, we can take solace that 007 is working on anger management. B
Ok I went to see Quantum of Solace on Firday opening night...
And I have to admit ... an entertaining film pretty reasonable... but fairly poor compared to Casino Royale...
Just too many of the real Bond elements are missing and its not getting any better...
Desmond Llewelyn did say one thing in an interview that has always stuck in my head in regards to the Bond film formula.. ''If there was not a Q, there wouldn't have been a Bond''
and thats the bloody problem with QoS. there no gadgetery what so ever. at least in CR, there was the little torch flash bomb used by the airport terrorist and the medical equipment and silenced P99 build into the glove box of the Aston DBS. which kept the flavour of gadgets alive to some degree.
For me QoS is boarder line Jason Borne. and why the hell was Peter Lamont not on this film. the man's track record and acheivments makes him an essential key to the production. For me there was too many paralels with DIE ANOTHER DAY . firstly , that realy poor Parachute jump with Bond and Camilie, after all the effors in CR to make the stunts real and outstanding and fresh what do they do ,,, Lets use Pathetic, Fake CGI again, I know it ruined DAD but lets do it again. another parallel to DAD was the obvious previous Bond film referances which were un-nesesary here, the girl dead on the Bed covered in oil' GOLDFINGER its been done... Bond and the girl walking through the desert in smart dress, and Bond knocking the guy off the roof by hitting his arm off his tie / shirt again TSWLM... and other bits here and there.
Dominic Greene , a pathetic waste of a character. trying to look evil , same sort of cover as Gustav graves helping the planet idea , The diamond mine now Green Planet. also his sort of side-kick elvis another pointless waste of an actors wage, and look closely hardly speaks, not a hint of character , and he even looks and acts a little like Gustav Graves's technician side-kick ''Vlad'' who modifys his armour suit and mantains the icarus satalite. its getting a little old.
If Q dosent come back in the next film I am seriously considering boycotting it. and the character has to be played by a good actor such as Michael Gambon or John Scessions. someone of that nature.
I would give QoS a 6/10 where as CR was a 9/10
in CR the casino scenes were very enjoyable a lot of talking and character development. in QoS chase after chase after chase a bit of CGI and then another bloody chase and perhaps the odd explosion, more CGI and then a chase...
it may sound like i hate the film i dont it was worth watching , entertaining but it kills me that there going too far from the Bond formula and it was not a worthy sequal to CASINO ROYALE.
the only actual character development in QoS was that od Renie Mathis, a great character brilliantly played.. Judi Dench was on good form. Daniel was also pretty good not as good as CR but he saves the film to some degree.
Agent Feilds could have played a bigger role by far. Cammile a bit of a cheap Bond girl.. not the classy standards you expect from a Bond beauty. although very attractive, a character let down..
Lets hope Bond 23 'lIVE BY ONE RULE DIE BY ANOTHER' gets back to the traditional Bond.
Is there bad CGI on this movie? I hope not, it made me almost hate DAD
Olga Kurylenko and Gemma Arterton are fine, but taken together they aren’t special. They’re certainly no Halle Berry.
And with that, the moron critic blows his own credibility to smithereens.
) I understand you may not like Halle Berry, which of course is a perfectly legit feeling, but I do think the critic makes a very valid point. Those two are no Halle Berry at all, I agree with him on this. They don't have her charisma and personality as an actress at all. Just my opinion of course. I found these to be two of the blandest, most forgettable Bond girls ever. Instead... that orange Halle bikini will forever be in my memory, and I'm a girl who likes men... actually exactly because of that, sexy as hell! I took notes! ) )
What I mean is.. I didn't like Eva Green as Vesper at all, but I would still make the same point the critic makes. Those two even together are no Eva Green, she has more personality. And that's from someone (me) who didn't like her at all in the part. But at least she managed to make me hate her?? Those two, I just don't even remember who they are and what they do and why after five mins ) )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
American critics are starting to chime in, and they've now brought QoS's RottenTomatoes score up to 79%. There are good notices from such prestigious publications as Time and The New Yorker, so things are boding well.
The RT Tomatometer has been like a rollercoaster lately--yesterday it was as high as 80%, now it's down to 71%. Looks like we've got another love-it-or-hate-it film on our hands.
Roger Ebert wrote a particularly nasty and scathing review. While still praising Craig's physicality, he ripped the rest of the film a new one, giving it only 2 out of 5 stars.
Still, his writeup only goes to show the fickle nature of critics. He laments the absence of the fantastic sets, Q and MoneyPenny yet he didn't seem to mind their omission from CR, which he praised. He decries Greene's plot as mundane and beneath Bond, yet he conveniently forgets that Bond's big assignment in CR was basically to win a poker game.
If you're going to praise or damn, at least be consistent. I don't care much at all for the series' current creative direction (or Craig's interpretation for that matter) but even I can tell that a lot of these "professional" reviews are based more on the reviewer's state of mind and general attitude when he/she saw the film than on any actual merits or flaws (which are all subjective to beign with).
I haven't seen the film yet, but the critical reaction to QoS so far (especially in America) reminds me somewhat of what happened with Timothy Dalton's tenure as Bond. The critics welcomed him with open arms and almost universally praised his performance in TLD, calling it a fresh take after Roger Moore's creaky last couple of films. Yet when it came time for his second foray, they wasted no time ripping LTK's darker and more violent story to bits.
That the Fox News reviewer disliked QOS is fine...it's personal opinion. Who knows, when I finally get to see it myself, maybe I won't like it either. What does bother me is this critics hypothesis of why the movie is being released in the US on 11/14 after Europe being presented as fact. The average people who attend movies in the US really don't pay any attention to how a film is doing in Europe. They are not checking out Bond fansites, etc. IMO it's rubbish. Fox news goes for sensationalism anyway...why let the facts get in the way. Another interesting question. The reviewer (American I assume)claims to have seen QOS in France where most English language films are dubbed into French. Even if he speaks fluent French...it would seem to me that any serious film critic would prefer to see a film in it's original language. Just a bit strange to me. But what do I know?
At 2 stars, QOS is the worst Ebert review since TLD, which also received 2 stars. Every other movie since TLD has been 3 or 3 1/2 stars.
His point in the opening paragraph that James Bond is not an action hero, is correct IMO. I have been saying this for awhile, what has always attracted me to Bond was more than action. if you think about the early Bonds, DN, FRWL, GF, etc, they had relatively little action. What they did have was gorgeous sets or locations, beautiful sexy women, some actual espionage, cools cars, gadgets (preferably something like the attache case as opposed to the invisible car), some humor and some interesting villians and hench men.
I gave a positive review to CR, but upon additional viewings I liked it less because I felt something was missing, it's all the little things that were missing. The little things that make Bond different from all the other action movies.
Reading various reviews and comments from long time members of this forum, I think other folks miss this part of Bond too.
Comments
More on it here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/oct/27/russell-brand-jonathan-ross-andrew-sachs-calls
Roger Moore 1927-2017
the lack of humour,
the never ending explosions,
the revenge obsessed Bond,
the lack of any romance,
but all wrapped up in a good looking package that ticks all the boxes without showing any great insight.
Hmmm sounds a bit like DAD, God forbid.
I'm really concerned that Purvis and Wade can't seem to write a decent script unless it features multiple explosions and special effects (okay CR was a good effort, with strings attatched) It reminds me of the Tom Mankiewicz days....
I do so hope I am not disappointed.
http://whatsontv.co.uk/blogs/movietalk/
Derek Malcolm of the Standard gives it only two out of five, however London Lite had two reviews, one a bloke Paul Connolly who gives it five out of five, another a woman reviewer giving it just two.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38947
Roger Moore 1927-2017
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/film/film-23369589-det
ails/Quantum+Of+Solace/filmReview.do?reviewId=23580022
I doubt Malcolm ever gave Roger Moore a decent review in his life, but it seems even he would love to see him again. I heard some punters discussing QoS as they left the cinema in Leicester Square. None were polite. "Bond is finished!" was one young man's response. It's doing brisk business as all the showings in LS and Tottenham Court Road were sold out, but I'm afraid word of mouth is already looking poor. Still, hopefully I'll get to make my mind up tomorrow.
Yes, Graham is frighteningly spot-on, with his review
{[] Yes I agree. It is that good.
{[]
http://debrief.commanderbond.net/index.php?showtopic=50887
:x
A bit long...but well worth the time; great style and wit---I love this sort of thing.
Apparently it's not a James Bond film---at least, not the sort to which we've become accustomed.
My God. I can't wait to see it.
I know I said I wouldn't post here until I saw the film but...I'm ill, I tell you. Ill!
X-(
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I saw it at the Odeon LS, on the 31st, 12.50pm showing,
it looked about 2/3 full - which was good, considering that it's playing EVERYWHERE
Hundreds of people in there - and NOT ONE PERSON CLAPPED at the end of the movie (which audiences tend to in the West End - especially I find, at opening day screenings, as there's always plenty of "fans" in the audience, which there appeared to be on that day)
People clapped in the Odeon LS at the end of CR though - and there wasn't half as many people in there, on the opening day
And I have to admit ... an entertaining film pretty reasonable... but fairly poor compared to Casino Royale...
Just too many of the real Bond elements are missing and its not getting any better...
Desmond Llewelyn did say one thing in an interview that has always stuck in my head in regards to the Bond film formula.. ''If there was not a Q, there wouldn't have been a Bond''
and thats the bloody problem with QoS. there no gadgetery what so ever. at least in CR, there was the little torch flash bomb used by the airport terrorist and the medical equipment and silenced P99 build into the glove box of the Aston DBS. which kept the flavour of gadgets alive to some degree.
For me QoS is boarder line Jason Borne. and why the hell was Peter Lamont not on this film. the man's track record and acheivments makes him an essential key to the production. For me there was too many paralels with DIE ANOTHER DAY . firstly , that realy poor Parachute jump with Bond and Camilie, after all the effors in CR to make the stunts real and outstanding and fresh what do they do ,,, Lets use Pathetic, Fake CGI again, I know it ruined DAD but lets do it again. another parallel to DAD was the obvious previous Bond film referances which were un-nesesary here, the girl dead on the Bed covered in oil' GOLDFINGER its been done... Bond and the girl walking through the desert in smart dress, and Bond knocking the guy off the roof by hitting his arm off his tie / shirt again TSWLM... and other bits here and there.
Dominic Greene , a pathetic waste of a character. trying to look evil , same sort of cover as Gustav graves helping the planet idea , The diamond mine now Green Planet. also his sort of side-kick elvis another pointless waste of an actors wage, and look closely hardly speaks, not a hint of character , and he even looks and acts a little like Gustav Graves's technician side-kick ''Vlad'' who modifys his armour suit and mantains the icarus satalite. its getting a little old.
If Q dosent come back in the next film I am seriously considering boycotting it. and the character has to be played by a good actor such as Michael Gambon or John Scessions. someone of that nature.
I would give QoS a 6/10 where as CR was a 9/10
in CR the casino scenes were very enjoyable a lot of talking and character development. in QoS chase after chase after chase a bit of CGI and then another bloody chase and perhaps the odd explosion, more CGI and then a chase...
it may sound like i hate the film i dont it was worth watching , entertaining but it kills me that there going too far from the Bond formula and it was not a worthy sequal to CASINO ROYALE.
the only actual character development in QoS was that od Renie Mathis, a great character brilliantly played.. Judi Dench was on good form. Daniel was also pretty good not as good as CR but he saves the film to some degree.
Agent Feilds could have played a bigger role by far. Cammile a bit of a cheap Bond girl.. not the classy standards you expect from a Bond beauty. although very attractive, a character let down..
Lets hope Bond 23 'lIVE BY ONE RULE DIE BY ANOTHER' gets back to the traditional Bond.
www.freewebs.com/scaramangasgoldengun
www.facebook.com/QuartermasterProps
I found this review interesting since it gave a reason behind the delayed opening here in the U.S.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,446151,00.html
Bond 'Solace': First U.S. Review
Here’s the truth about the latest James Bond movie, "Quantum of Solace." It’s not very good.
Quantum opened on Friday in London and Paris, and there was a reason. MGM and Sony were obviously scared that a highly negative reaction in the U.S. would scare off the rest of the world. So they went with Europe first, hoping for the best. In Paris, at least, Friday was a school holiday, meaning kids were flocking to theaters and malls anyway.
By coincidence, I was in Paris on Friday and went with a herd of 16-year-old boys and one 11-year-old, as well as one mother. It was a cold, rainy afternoon, and I had high hopes for a roller coaster ride full of explosions, inexplicable derrying do, some decent quips and memorable lines, even a smidgen of smarmy sex for James with a couple of babes.
What else do we look forward to in James Bond? Readings from Rilke? No. We want gadgets. And a great theme song. And a spectacular opening sequence.
The truth then: we got none of the above, except maybe the Rilke and deep frown lines. Marc Forster, one of our favorite directors from “Finding Neverland” and “Monster’s Ball” has turned James Bond 007 into a meditation on death and trust. He’s made the straight play version of what’s supposed to be a musical comedy.
Let’s start with the music. There couldn’t be a worse, more tuneless song than Alicia Keys’ and Jack White’s “Another Day to Die.” From Shirley Bass to Carly Simon, Paul McCartney, even Duran Duran or Sheena Easton, the people behind James Bond theme songs knew enough to match their pop hit to the original John Barry music, provide a bit of drama and suggest romance. Keys and White, brought in at the last minute to replace the ailing Amy Winehouse, just didn’t get it.
The song is a bad omen, because it follows the shortest, least interesting opening sequence in Bond history. Suffice to say, when it blends into the first notes of the Keys-White song, your first thought will be, That’s it? Yes, that’s it.
The solace James is seeking in quantum, I guess, is all about losing Vesper, the girlfriend from “Casino Royale.” All well and good, but James Bond doesn’t mourn on screen. Paul Haggis and the writers should have known, Bond got over it since we saw him last. The audience did, believe me. Instead we’re left with this problem. Few viewers will recall Eva Green’s Vesper. They won’t much go for the new Bond girls, neither of whom has name marquee value. How about as one of the girls Heidi Klum? Eva Mendes? Audrey Tatou? Olga Kurylenko and Gemma Arterton are fine, but taken together they aren’t special. They’re certainly no Halle Berry.
The secondary cast works well, especially Judi Dench as M, although there’s lots less of her. There’s no Q, and no one to introduce James to new gadgets (this in the time of new gadgets in the real world every hour and blogs galore devoted to them!). Mathieu Amalric is just great and looks right at Mr. Green, the new villain, but as in the whole of the film there’s not a lot of sly dialogue. The Daniel Craig version of Bond isn’t very articulate or quick verbally, hence neither are his opponents. All the parrying is gone.
Quantum of Solace had a huge opening in Britain on Friday — $8 million. We’ll see how it does between now and opening day in America on November 14th. Something tells me once the excitement wears down, the new James Bond is not going to be one of those that anyone wants to see over and over again. In the meantime, I found myself more shaken than stirred by this latest installment.
That assumes Eon already felt it was a stinker back when the release date was changed, on 21st August. According to MI6...
http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/bond_22_prod_diary39.php3?t=qos&s=qos&id=02012
...Forster presented his first cut to Eon in "late August" (unspecified beyond that here) and was still editing the film on 14th September...though he was complaining that he felt rushed during the editing process. For this theory to hold water, you have to believe that Eon was convinced---at that time---that another two or three weeks of editing (at least!) could not 'save' it.
Of course it's possible...but then that would allow for poisonous word-of-mouth to really 'sink in' over two weeks' time, and potentially cripple what might have otherwise been a huge opening in the States. Doesn't seem like the ideal strategy to maximize box office $$$$, though I'm certainly no authority on the matter.
I happen to think it's more likely that the reason given on 21st August---that they wanted to open a bit later to play into December for the holidays---is more likely. Reviews and fanboy reaction have been mixed, but it's a bit early to say (other than isolated anecdotals) how general audiences are reacting. Only time will tell if the film has legs, and ultimately box office will tell the story.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Agent 007 (Daniel Craig) is a very mad man in Quantum of Solace, a cold and vengeful chapter in the James Bond saga with little interest in coherence, and even less in the kind of sensual pleasures and vicarious high-life thrills once anticipated from movies about Her Majesty's best-dressed secret service agent. A virtuoso action sequence is de rigueur at the start of any Bond film, of course. But the bullet-spraying car chase in Siena, Italy, that opens the 22nd edition — the second foray starring Craig as a Bond as bleak as his eyes are blue — is a Sunday drive compared with the intensity of the fury coming off that complicated British secret agent.
Quantum picks up more or less where Casino Royale left off two years ago. Stinging from his presumed betrayal by the late (alas) Vesper Lynd, the one babe Bond truly loved (adieu, sultry Eva Green!), 007 is hell-bent on uncovering the truth about QUANTUM, the maxi-secret international organization that blackmailed her. Applying enhanced interrogation techniques to the Euro-creepy Mr. White (Jesper Christensen), who was reeled in at the end of the last picture, seems like a good place for Bond and his impeccable boss, M (divine Judi Dench, crisp and tart as a Granny Smith apple), to begin. But it's not long — it's instantly, actually, after the revelation of a mole in MI6 erupts into a gigantic glass-shattering, oof-and-wham, parkour-influenced action scramble — before we're relying on screen titles to update us on Bond's busy itinerary. First he's in London, reporting for a less-than-satisfactory performance review (M, egged on by the CIA, wonders whether her man is even-keeled enough for his job). Then he's in Haiti, crossing paths with a sleuthing beauty named Camille (Olga Kurylenko) while searching for a nefarious Monsieur Greene (Mathieu Amalric, both eyes wide open after The Diving Bell and the Butterfly), who's a QUANTUM baddie with plans to mess with global natural resources. Next he's in Austria, he's in South America, he's...well, with the biggest budget in Bond movie history, he's wherever the producers and director Marc Forster (Finding Neverland) want him to be.
The point is, wherever he is, this James Bond is ****ed. And that ceaseless anger begins to curdle every sequence that might otherwise bring a little happiness. I mean happiness for us, the viewers — whether we're watching a scene at an avant-garde opera, a seduction, or a showy action sequence shot in a smeary color palette of browns.
With his assumption of the role in 2006, Craig triumphantly announced that there's a new 007 in town. Through his very physicality, and through his fresh interpretation of James Bond as a potent man with little interest in the silly stuff of shaken-not-stirred rituals, the actor scoured the iconic character of plaque and mannerisms. But having created such a tiger, this dark fellow needs a suitable jungle in which to prowl.
I mean it as a cockeyed compliment to the reborn Bond franchise, then, when I say that Quantum of Solace is an unnecessarily cramped arena for such an interesting cat. Bond chases Greene with grim determination (Amalric himself is a villain of mild physical proportions, with flourishes of evil limited to a glittering hardness in the eyes). But 007 turns that same ray-gun attitude of mirthlessness on practical conversations with Camille (the beauty doesn't have time for bedroom thoughts since she's plotting a vendetta against a South American baddie of her own); on office updates with M; and on intelligence gathered from the wily CIA agent Felix Leiter (as played by Jeffrey Wright, the coolest cat in the story). Working with a screenplay by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, and Paul Haggis, Forster (the German-Swiss director who titrated the chemistry between Billy Bob Thornton and Halle Berry in Monster's Ball) offers little cinematic distinction between scenes of rage, jet lag, and the drinking of those iconic cocktails.
I have a feeling, or at least a wish, that in the next Bond picture — Craig's committed to two more — this 21st-century spy will gain greater access to his own character strengths; I hope the director will allow his star to play. For now, we can take solace that 007 is working on anger management. B
Is there bad CGI on this movie? I hope not, it made me almost hate DAD
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Thanks, I am anxious to see and form my own opinion,
Its a shame because 90% of the movies stunts are great
www.freewebs.com/scaramangasgoldengun
www.facebook.com/QuartermasterProps
And with that, the moron critic blows his own credibility to smithereens.
What I mean is.. I didn't like Eva Green as Vesper at all, but I would still make the same point the critic makes. Those two even together are no Eva Green, she has more personality. And that's from someone (me) who didn't like her at all in the part. But at least she managed to make me hate her?? Those two, I just don't even remember who they are and what they do and why after five mins
Still, his writeup only goes to show the fickle nature of critics. He laments the absence of the fantastic sets, Q and MoneyPenny yet he didn't seem to mind their omission from CR, which he praised. He decries Greene's plot as mundane and beneath Bond, yet he conveniently forgets that Bond's big assignment in CR was basically to win a poker game.
If you're going to praise or damn, at least be consistent. I don't care much at all for the series' current creative direction (or Craig's interpretation for that matter) but even I can tell that a lot of these "professional" reviews are based more on the reviewer's state of mind and general attitude when he/she saw the film than on any actual merits or flaws (which are all subjective to beign with).
Here's a link to the full review: Roger Ebert Reviews QoS
I haven't seen the film yet, but the critical reaction to QoS so far (especially in America) reminds me somewhat of what happened with Timothy Dalton's tenure as Bond. The critics welcomed him with open arms and almost universally praised his performance in TLD, calling it a fresh take after Roger Moore's creaky last couple of films. Yet when it came time for his second foray, they wasted no time ripping LTK's darker and more violent story to bits.
His point in the opening paragraph that James Bond is not an action hero, is correct IMO. I have been saying this for awhile, what has always attracted me to Bond was more than action. if you think about the early Bonds, DN, FRWL, GF, etc, they had relatively little action. What they did have was gorgeous sets or locations, beautiful sexy women, some actual espionage, cools cars, gadgets (preferably something like the attache case as opposed to the invisible car), some humor and some interesting villians and hench men.
I gave a positive review to CR, but upon additional viewings I liked it less because I felt something was missing, it's all the little things that were missing. The little things that make Bond different from all the other action movies.
Reading various reviews and comments from long time members of this forum, I think other folks miss this part of Bond too.