Alessandra is now 'defending' herself BECAUSE of her earlier negative posts/attacks...as you sow so shall you reap...we should all learn to 'play nice' and RESPECT the views of the other, sadly, that's been lacking on this thread for awhile.
Um, the last word is that Alessandra hasn't made any personal attacks on anyone, so she's not reaping anything she's sowed, just in case she thinks that's a universal opinion from the moderators.
But yes, this thread should now continue as a base for reviews only.
I have no other words to describe QOS but horrible, I was extremely dissapionted realizing this bond movie had nothing classic in it! There where no cool gadgets, Q wasn't even in the movie and the cellphones and pc's weren't really things that you can only imagine bond having. The signatures Aston Martin was only in the beginning and got totaled and it didn't have any bomb's or missles. They took james bond a sophisticated,clean, womanizer super spy and made him into just another hardcore action movie hero banked on revenge killing everyone in his way with sucked. his classic jokes and puns were left out, there was no classic semi-happy ending with bond getting the girl etc. even the intro sucked, the song was not right for the video, their was way to much talking and last but not least the villans plot sucked. Unlike normally where the villan has a huge laser or bomb or whateva this one just wants to control the water-supply in 3th world countries. Makers of bond please hear our cries and go back to the classics or basics whatever.
Forget to say something so that nobody starts hating or anyhing. I have noooooothing against the directors or daniel craig their are great at their jobs but I just want to see the original bond structure again so please bring it back.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,991Quartermasters
I have noticed some rather low blows about 'Italian taste' in particular...even quoting Italian box office figures.
I'm not sure if you're referring to me, M5, but if so, I want to clarify that it was intended to be purely in fun; merely pointing out that the new film wasn't a complete failure there:
The rest of that post was a deliberately Craig-deprecating remark about lovely Italian women finding him unattractive....that was when I thought there was still some fun to be had on this front, though I've obviously since learnt otherwise.
I hereby sincerely apologize---I'm Sorry*---to anyone (especially Alessandra) offended by my quoting Italian box office figures. I'm sure that Italian figures are perfectly in order ;%
* How it's done
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I have noticed some rather low blows about 'Italian taste' in particular...even quoting Italian box office figures.
I'm not sure if you're referring to me, M5, but if so, I want to clarify that it was intended to be purely in fun; merely pointing out that the new film wasn't a complete failure there:
The rest of that post was a deliberately Craig-deprecating remark about lovely Italian women finding him unattractive....that was when I thought there was still some fun to be had on this front, though I've obviously since learnt otherwise.
I hereby sincerely apologize---I'm Sorry*---to anyone (especially Alessandra) offended by my quoting Italian box office figures. I'm sure that Italian figures are perfectly in order ;%
* How it's done
Isn't the line "I'm sure the figures are perfectly rounded".
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,991Quartermasters
Isn't the line "I'm sure the figures are perfectly rounded".
Yeah...but I'll let you say it B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I have no other words to describe QOS but horrible, I was extremely dissapionted realizing this bond movie had nothing classic in it! There where no cool gadgets, Q wasn't even in the movie and the cellphones and pc's weren't really things that you can only imagine bond having. The signatures Aston Martin was only in the beginning and got totaled and it didn't have any bomb's or missles. They took james bond a sophisticated,clean, womanizer super spy and made him into just another hardcore action movie hero banked on revenge killing everyone in his way with sucked. his classic jokes and puns were left out, there was no classic semi-happy ending with bond getting the girl etc. even the intro sucked, the song was not right for the video, their was way to much talking and last but not least the villans plot sucked. Unlike normally where the villan has a huge laser or bomb or whateva this one just wants to control the water-supply in 3th world countries. Makers of bond please hear our cries and go back to the classics or basics whatever.
Very funny review.
I don't like QoS either, but I am asking myself, when the last time has been, that you have seen a 007 movie??
Or have you only seen so far the Roger Moore Bonds, which are shown regularly on TV ?:)
I rather liked the movie, liking it more on my second viewing.
This may seem odd, but QoS reminds me a lot of Moonraker . . . the book, and that is a good thing.
Both are relatively short. In terms of the villainous plot, almost nothing is as it seems, and in both plots certain details could prove embarrassing for the government. No sex between Bond and the main female characters, who are rather similar to each other. Both are also relatively dark in their overall feel, despite in both, Bond emerging with a successful outcome.
I rather liked the movie, liking it more on my second viewing.
This may seem odd, but QoS reminds me a lot of Moonraker . . . the book, and that is a good thing.
Both are relatively short. In terms of the villainous plot, almost nothing is as it seems, and in both plots certain details could prove embarrassing for the government. No sex between Bond and the main female characters, who are rather similar to each other. Both are also relatively dark in their overall feel, despite in both, Bond emerging with a successful outcome.
Agree, it did feel a lot like a modern adaptation of a Fleming novel. I read somewhere that Camille was based on some notes of his that were found after his death?
I saw QOS last night. I probably will see it again, but I have to admitt that I didn't particularly enjoy it. I wanted to; I rewatched much of CR the night before, I pre-booked myself an ideal seat and I arrived determined to have a good time. But I ended up being really disappointed. Partly because I have alot of problems with the way the film was written and edited, and many of the decisions the producers made (such as rehiring Haggis), but also because this wasn't the Bond I knew and loved.
I don't think the action scenes suited his character (in a similar way to a climatic action scene not suiting the character of John McClane in Die Hard 4.0) and I found him to be rather unpleasant. One member noted that he was a cold b****rd, except for me, while Bond is perfectly capable of being a cold b****rd, he is IMO also sympathetic, and in this film, he wasn't.
One of the most disappointing things for me is that, while I wanted to see CR again and was left stunned by its final scene, by the time QOS ended, I was left rather empty and not particularly enthused to see it again (although I undoubtfully will, just not anytime soon.)
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I took no offense for Italian box office figures. The issues are not with the box office figures themselves (or with Loeffs either), what can figures do? ) I think we all have different ways to both take offense and apologise. And that's good or it would get very boring. If we all said things the same way, I guess we'd have books for love declarations too? Wait, we do have those already. Horrendous, but they are there and sell a lot )
Actually I was instead shocked with the box office results, since the second week, QoS was topped at the box office by a ridiculous, lame comic movie starring a famous Italian comic actor and an Italian TV presenter. Which not only is not good in absolute terms as going to see lame Italian comic movies is bad in itself for my nation ), but also it's not good in that it means the novelty wore off quickly, and for one reason or another people preferred that movie to the Bond one. Again, not that it pleases me, seen what movie people chose to go watch. Ugh.
I don't think the action scenes suited his character (in a similar way to a climatic action scene not suiting the character of John McClane in Die Hard 4.0) and I found him to be rather unpleasant. One member noted that he was a cold b****rd, except for me, while Bond is perfectly capable of being a cold b****rd, he is IMO also sympathetic, and in this film, he wasn't.
I find this a very good point Dan. Guess that is part of what some of us pointed out in term of lack of Bond presence in the movie and lack of Bond elements, but you expressed it better.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
One member noted that he was a cold b****rd, except for me, while Bond is perfectly capable of being a cold b****rd, he is IMO also sympathetic, and in this film, he wasn't.
You're missing the point. QoS is the kind of movie we should've had after OHMSS. Bond's love, his true love, is dead. He is angry, yet still bound to his duty. He gets his job done, but he shouldn't be all jokes and fun *cough* DAF *cough*.
If your true love was, in effect, cheated and murdered by an organization, would you be off gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget?
I don't think the action scenes suited his character (in a similar way to a climatic action scene not suiting the character of John McClane in Die Hard 4.0) and I found him to be rather unpleasant. One member noted that he was a cold b****rd, except for me, while Bond is perfectly capable of being a cold b****rd, he is IMO also sympathetic, and in this film, he wasn't.
I find this a very good point Dan. Guess that is part of what some of us pointed out in term of lack of Bond presence in the movie and lack of Bond elements, but you expressed it better.
You're missing the point. QoS is the kind of movie we should've had after OHMSS. Bond's love, his true love, is dead. He is angry, yet still bound to his duty. He gets his job done, but he shouldn't be all jokes and fun *cough* DAF *cough*.
If your true love was, in effect, cheated and murdered by an organization, would you be off gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget?
I'm not missing the point. I just don't think it's either or. Yes, Bond shouldn't be all jokey, but nor do I think he should be a sociopath whom I grew to dislike. DAF, although I did enjoy it, was completely inappropiate as it should have been a revenge movie. But why go the other extreme? Yes, Bond shouldn't be 'gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget' (which is not so bad actually :v) but we should still feel for him. My strongest reaction was that this guy should be in prison. I don't know, I guess it comes down to what we want of Bond. For me, QOS's Bond came too terrifyingly close, and I hate to say it because it's been said numerous times before, to Bourne.
Plus, the other things is, some of the stunts Bond did were IMO beyond his capabilities. The opening chase scene in CR was superb; yet the Bond which executed that arguably would not have been able to execute (no pun intended) some of the stunts in QOS, and QOS began staright after CR.
One final comment; Bond has been ruthless before. He has been cold before. He has been a b*****d before. But I always felt empathy for him as he seemed to me to have a soul and was always extremely sympathetic; in QOS, he comes across to me as too much of a souless killing machine, and a rather unpleasant one at that.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
I don't know, I have trouble agreeing with him being a soulless killing machine any more than any other Bond, especially Brosnan.
Just because Brosnan made a sly remark after killing twenty people while dual wielding submachine guns in a ridiculous fashion, doesn't give him a soul. At least Craig's Bond actually has to deal with each kill - he bleeds, he hides the bodies, he struggles.
One member noted that he was a cold b****rd, except for me, while Bond is perfectly capable of being a cold b****rd, he is IMO also sympathetic, and in this film, he wasn't.
You're missing the point. QoS is the kind of movie we should've had after OHMSS. Bond's love, his true love, is dead. He is angry, yet still bound to his duty. He gets his job done, but he shouldn't be all jokes and fun *cough* DAF *cough*.
If your true love was, in effect, cheated and murdered by an organization, would you be off gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget?
This is a fair point. But this still is a movie (with a lot of things that require suspension of disbelief in it) and he still is James Bond, not an average Joe who can afford the luxury to change character and attitude because someone he loved died. He is a spy and he is supposed to always be who he is, as that's part of his job. Besides "Yes, dammit, I said "was". The bitch is dead now." is how it ends. Not to mention Bond knows Vesper committed suicide, so while it can still be played with him wanting to make the bad guys pay for his torments, there's no reason for him to not be charming and witty with women as he usually does (as that's part of his job, and actually would carry out his revenge more quickly) or to not have Q by his side giving him gadgets, or Moneypenny worrying and fantasising about him.
He must be a sympathetic character because he's the good guy who saves the world from the bad guys, be it for personal reasons or for Her Majesty. And as Dan said, he really is not in this movie. As far as I'm concerned, that is because he lacks the elements that make him who he is, and distinguish him from random badass spies. He seems more like Robocop on a killing spree to me in QoS.
I liked Timothy Dalton as Bond even though he was not my favourite, but I really do like LTK. That's Bond on revenge mode but he is still very sympathetic and not just a robot. Dalton doesn't lack Bond style, he still has the humour, he has Q helping him out and having actually a scene that always makes me laugh when I see it (When Pam fumes because she finds out he's been with Lupe ) ), and Q is all "well he is on a mission, he uses ALL means!" ) ) poor Q in that scene), he has incredibly beautiful Bond girls and he does get the girl in the end. He's got it all even if he is on revenge mode. I don't see this in QoS, I really can't find the traits that make Bond who he is.
To make him a Bond on revenge mode it is not necessary to take away all the characteristics that make Bond who he is, and it's not necessary to get to the point where he is unsympathetic, as Dan said.
Then of course, some may prefer it this way. I just happen not to.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
One member noted that he was a cold b****rd, except for me, while Bond is perfectly capable of being a cold b****rd, he is IMO also sympathetic, and in this film, he wasn't.
You're missing the point. QoS is the kind of movie we should've had after OHMSS. Bond's love, his true love, is dead. He is angry, yet still bound to his duty. He gets his job done, but he shouldn't be all jokes and fun *cough* DAF *cough*.
If your true love was, in effect, cheated and murdered by an organization, would you be off gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget?
This is a fair point. But this still is a movie (with a lot of things that require suspension of disbelief in it) and he still is James Bond, not an average Joe who can afford the luxury to change character and attitude because someone he loved died. He is a spy and he is supposed to always be who he is, as that's part of his job. Besides "Yes, dammit, I said "was". The bitch is dead now." is how it ends. Not to mention Bond knows Vesper committed suicide, so while it can still be played with him wanting to make the bad guys pay for his torments, there's no reason for him to not be charming and witty with women as he usually does (as that's part of his job, and actually would carry out his revenge more quickly) or to not have Q by his side giving him gadgets, or Moneypenny worrying and fantasising about him.
He must be a sympathetic character because he's the good guy who saves the world from the bad guys, be it for personal reasons or for Her Majesty. And as Dan said, he really is not in this movie. As far as I'm concerned, that is because he lacks the elements that make him who he is, and distinguish him from random badass spies. He seems more like Robocop on a killing spree to me in QoS.
The difference, to me, is that the Bond in QoS is a three-dimensional character. You guys may argue that he's one note - revenge, but I think to revert back to playful Bond type after such a devastating moment in his life would be just one-dimensional.
I don't know, I have trouble agreeing with him being a soulless killing machine any more than any other Bond, especially Brosnan.
It's subjective of course, and for me, Craig wasn't soulless in CR. Although he will never challenge my three favourtite Bonds (Connery, Brosnan and Moore), he wasn't all that bad in CR.
Just because Brosnan made a sly remark after killing twenty people while dual wielding submachine guns in a ridiculous fashion, doesn't give him a soul.
True, but that's not what I'm saying. Connery, Lazenby, Moore and Brosnan all came across to me as professionals who did not enjoy killing but did so as a necessity of their job and only when required. That is why Brosnan's killings of Kaufman and Electra were so shocking to me. With Craig's Bond in QOS, I think he would have, perhaps not enjoyed, but certainly wouldn't have disliked those two kills.
At least Craig's Bond actually has to deal with each kill - he bleeds, he hides the bodies, he struggles.
In CR, perhaps, but in QOS? I didn't see him struggle at all, save for the scene when he was giving a tutorial on killing. But apart from that really, it seemed to me that he wanted to kill everybody he came into contact with. As for hiding the bodies, I don't see it. Perhaps in CR, but in QOS, I think it was just cold, unsurprising perhaps, but cold nonetheless
what he did to Mathis.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
You're missing the point. QoS is the kind of movie we should've had after OHMSS. Bond's love, his true love, is dead. He is angry, yet still bound to his duty. He gets his job done, but he shouldn't be all jokes and fun *cough* DAF *cough*.
If your true love was, in effect, cheated and murdered by an organization, would you be off gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget?
This is a fair point. But this still is a movie (with a lot of things that require suspension of disbelief in it) and he still is James Bond, not an average Joe who can afford the luxury to change character and attitude because someone he loved died. He is a spy and he is supposed to always be who he is, as that's part of his job. Besides "Yes, dammit, I said "was". The bitch is dead now." is how it ends. Not to mention Bond knows Vesper committed suicide, so while it can still be played with him wanting to make the bad guys pay for his torments, there's no reason for him to not be charming and witty with women as he usually does (as that's part of his job, and actually would carry out his revenge more quickly) or to not have Q by his side giving him gadgets, or Moneypenny worrying and fantasising about him.
He must be a sympathetic character because he's the good guy who saves the world from the bad guys, be it for personal reasons or for Her Majesty. And as Dan said, he really is not in this movie. As far as I'm concerned, that is because he lacks the elements that make him who he is, and distinguish him from random badass spies. He seems more like Robocop on a killing spree to me in QoS.
The difference, to me, is that the Bond in QoS is a three-dimensional character. You guys may argue that he's one note - revenge, but I think to revert back to playful Bond type after such a devastating moment in his life would be just one-dimensional.
I guess we see different dimensions of the one-dimensional ) ) To me he's just a robot here and he's got nothing that differentiates him from a random spy of whatever other movie. As I said (sorry, was editing my post while you were posting, we were simul-writing )) Dalton did play Bond on revenge, but all the elements were still there. I think it's just a matter of how one prefers it really. I don't want ONLY playful, but I do want Bond's humour and style and charm... I think Dalton did manage to keep that (that sentence on the boat and at the end with Pam always cracks me up), but the Craig Bond just didn't in QoS. Again, just me.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
The difference, to me, is that the Bond in QoS is a three-dimensional character. You guys may argue that he's one note - revenge, but I think to revert back to playful Bond type after such a devastating moment in his life would be just one-dimensional.
Can we agree on a middle ground? :v We'll keep our playful Bond type, and you keep your QOS's Bond, and replace them with a Bond from the early films? DN-TB? I don't think that one could argue that Connery's Bond was too playful or not enough.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
In CR, perhaps, but in QOS? :O I didn't see him struggle at all, save for the scene when he was giving a tutorial on killing. But apart from that really, it seemed to me that he wanted to kill everybody he came into contact with. As for hiding the bodies, I don't see it. Perhaps in CR, but in QOS, I think it was just cold, unsurprising perhaps, but cold nonetheless.
That's how I took it too. And frankly, not even in CR I saw him having much of a soul (But I'm one of those heretics who don't like CR )). I also take issue with the excessive violence in QoS, I mentioned this before. There have been killings all the time in Bond movies because of what they are, but I never have seen the "complacency" for violence that I saw both in that CR killing scene where they kept showing the man struggling until he was dead and in countless QoS scenes that just indulge in gory details. There was a certain "taste" before CR in handling the killing scenes, and I find that is gone now. Another reason why I find myself not liking this turn.
Dan, agreed, the middle ground is definitely the solution
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
This is a fair point. But this still is a movie (with a lot of things that require suspension of disbelief in it) and he still is James Bond, not an average Joe who can afford the luxury to change character and attitude because someone he loved died. He is a spy and he is supposed to always be who he is, as that's part of his job. Besides "Yes, dammit, I said "was". The bitch is dead now." is how it ends. Not to mention Bond knows Vesper committed suicide, so while it can still be played with him wanting to make the bad guys pay for his torments, there's no reason for him to not be charming and witty with women as he usually does (as that's part of his job, and actually would carry out his revenge more quickly) or to not have Q by his side giving him gadgets, or Moneypenny worrying and fantasising about him.
He must be a sympathetic character because he's the good guy who saves the world from the bad guys, be it for personal reasons or for Her Majesty. And as Dan said, he really is not in this movie. As far as I'm concerned, that is because he lacks the elements that make him who he is, and distinguish him from random badass spies. He seems more like Robocop on a killing spree to me in QoS.
The difference, to me, is that the Bond in QoS is a three-dimensional character. You guys may argue that he's one note - revenge, but I think to revert back to playful Bond type after such a devastating moment in his life would be just one-dimensional.
I guess we see different dimensions of the one-dimensional ) ) To me he's just a robot here and he's got nothing that differentiates him from a random spy of whatever other movie. As I said (sorry, was editing my post while you were posting, we were simul-writing )) Dalton did play Bond on revenge, but all the elements were still there. I think it's just a matter of how one prefers it really. I don't want ONLY playful, but I do want Bond's humour and style and charm... I think Dalton did manage to keep that (that sentence on the boat and at the end with Pam always cracks me up), but the Craig Bond just didn't in QoS. Again, just me.
I don't think License to Kill's revenge is equal. Sure, Felix Leiter is his good friend, but a lot of Bond's humor and charm comes where women are involved. In LtK, Bond is avenging a friend, not a lover, and therefore isn't emotionally hampered in the love department. In QoS, his emotional problems are in a different place.
And come on, Dalton's style was pretty awful. Nice tuxes, but his casual wear is just...
I also take issue with the excessive violence in QoS, I mentioned this before. There have been killings all the time in Bond movies because of what they are, but I never have seen the "complacency" for violence that I saw both in that CR killing scene where they kept showing the man struggling until he was dad and in countless QoS scenes that just indulge in gory details. There was a certain "taste" before CR in handling the killing scenes, and I find that is gone now. Another reason why I find myself not liking this turn.
Yeh, I don't have a problem with cinematic violence mysef, but there's something unelegant about the violence in QOS.
Dan, agreed, the middle ground is definitely the solution
{[]
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
Just because Brosnan made a sly remark after killing twenty people while dual wielding submachine guns in a ridiculous fashion, doesn't give him a soul.
True, but that's not what I'm saying. Connery, Lazenby, Moore and Brosnan all came across to me as professionals who did not enjoy killing but did so as a necessity of their job and only when required. That is why Brosnan's killings of Kaufman and Electra were so shocking to me. With Craig's Bond in QOS, I think he would have, perhaps not enjoyed, but certainly wouldn't have disliked those two kills.
I don't think Craig likes killing. I'm not sure you do either - you say he is so lacking of joy in the movie, so how can you say he enjoys killing?
He does it when he has to. When he feels he has to for the job, he does. End of story. He was going to kill Vesper in CR when he said "allow me", because his duty is what comples him to kill. But of course he wouldnt enjoy it.
At least Craig's Bond actually has to deal with each kill - he bleeds, he hides the bodies, he struggles.
In CR, perhaps, but in QOS? I didn't see him struggle at all, save for the scene when he was giving a tutorial on killing. But apart from that really, it seemed to me that he wanted to kill everybody he came into contact with. As for hiding the bodies, I don't see it. Perhaps in CR, but in QOS, I think it was just cold, unsurprising perhaps, but cold nonetheless
what he did to Mathis.
The scene where he lets his assailant bleed out after he stabs him in the leg? Struggle. I honestly need to go watch it again (I've been sick, so haven't gotten out to see it a second time), and I'll give more examples.
Man, where is Loeffs when you need his help? )
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
In CR, perhaps, but in QOS? :O I didn't see him struggle at all, save for the scene when he was giving a tutorial on killing. But apart from that really, it seemed to me that he wanted to kill everybody he came into contact with. As for hiding the bodies, I don't see it. Perhaps in CR, but in QOS, I think it was just cold, unsurprising perhaps, but cold nonetheless.
That's how I took it too. And frankly, not even in CR I saw him having much of a soul (But I'm one of those heretics who don't like CR )). I also take issue with the excessive violence in QoS, I mentioned this before. There have been killings all the time in Bond movies because of what they are, but I never have seen the "complacency" for violence that I saw both in that CR killing scene where they kept showing the man struggling until he was dead and in countless QoS scenes that just indulge in gory details. There was a certain "taste" before CR in handling the killing scenes, and I find that is gone now. Another reason why I find myself not liking this turn.
Another place we disagree - I don't believe that showing the horror of killing and the reality of death is tasteless. In fact, I find it having more taste. I don't think killing ten people in a newspaper factory and then joking about printing anything these days is tasteful - making death a joke does not make it tasteful, it just makes it escapist. However, by making death gritty, and dark, and real, we can see that it is something that takes responsibility and struggle.
I don't think License to Kill's revenge is equal. Sure, Felix Leiter is his good friend, but a lot of Bond's humor and charm comes where women are involved. In LtK, Bond is avenging a friend, not a lover, and therefore isn't emotionally hampered in the love department. In QoS, his emotional problems are in a different place.
And come on, Dalton's style was pretty awful. Nice tuxes, but his casual wear is just...
) I think we eviscerated the style theme before, why does this sound familiar? ) Aside from the fact I do like Dalton's casual clothes there a lot, it's not just the clothes, it's the person wearing them that makes the difference with style, it's the way one moves, behaves, carries themselves. I found Dalton's Bond extremely stylish despite the situation.
And actually, I think avenging someone's best friend is a much deeper emotion than avenging a lover. Especially if it's James Bond. Lovers come and go, friends don't. Also, may I point out again that the conclusion is "the bitch is dead" and she committed suicide? Bond knows Vesper committed suicide. Naturally it's the bad guys' fault, but it still doesn't change what the reaction at the end of CR is, he's over it by the end of the book already.
So now he should be in a different place emotionally. I still don't think any of this justifies turning him into Robocop. Besides, it's a movie, it's not real life, and with all the ridiculously implausible things they do (like the pre title scene with places in Italy being hundreds of kilometers far away being presented as if they were one next to the other out of a tunnel, just to cite one), keeping Bond a sympathetic character seems the least to me.
I really do think it's just a matter of preference, and I agree with Dan the middle ground is the best solution. I don't only want the jokes, but I do want the Bond elements that make him who he is in a movie, and not just a random badass. I think Dalton completely achieved that in LTK and I truly enjoyed the movie despite it being "different" from the usual Bond (though I found TLD far from satisfying). I think they went overboard with the Robocop on killing spree concept here. Again, my personal preference.. I do get your point Nightshooter though.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
I don't think Craig likes killing. I'm not sure you do either - you say he is so lacking of joy in the movie, so how can you say he enjoys killing?
Well, I did say he 'wouldn't have disliked' it, which is a difference. Nobody, in their right mind, enjoys killing, (and you can be sure that I certainly don't ) but there's a difference between not enjoying and being reluctant. The Bond in QOS didn't come across to me as particularly reluctant; if he had, alot less people would have been killed.
He does it when he has to. When he feels he has to for the job, he does. End of story. He was going to kill Vesper in CR when he said "allow me", because his duty is what comples him to kill. But of course he wouldnt enjoy it.
Except it's so unnecessary. You mentioned CR; why kill the bombmaker? And if that was his goal, why not do it earlier? Craig's Bond (particularly in QOS) comes across to me as either very incompetent or extremely callous. Either way, it's not the Bond I know and love.
The scene where he lets his assailant bleed out after he stabs him in the leg? Struggle. I honestly need to go watch it again (I've been sick, so haven't gotten out to see it a second time), and I'll give more examples.
Considering that he didn't really need to kill him in the first place, it didn't seem like he struggled all that much.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
Oh, Dan, sometimes you amuse me.
What a double standard you have. Bond killed 25 people in TND. I highly doubt he killed 25 people in QoS.
Bond killed the Bombmaker because it was better than getting captured and letting him escape.
Bond had to kill that guy, because he attacked and tried to kill Bond. Just cause it was a more brutal killing, doesn't make it any different than Pierce Brosnan shooting up random lackeys.
Another place we disagree - I don't believe that showing the horror of killing and the reality of death is tasteless. In fact, I find it having more taste. I don't think killing ten people in a newspaper factory and then joking about printing anything these days is tasteful - making death a joke does not make it tasteful, it just makes it escapist. However, by making death gritty, and dark, and real, we can see that it is something that takes responsibility and struggle.
See, I don't see any struggle. I see the same "I need to do it for work" attitude they had before and on top of that, an attitude as in "it's like crushing an object, no difference, who cares if it's human life" , both in CR and in QoS. And that's not the Bond I've read about in the books and loved in the movies. I really just and only see Robocop here.
Besides, it's not like the Bond movies have any educational purpose :O I think the indulgence in such scenes is distasteful, and nothing that makes the viewer think "he shouldn't be killing that person so easily". To me, they're just indulging in details because with all those CSI etc series now people see the gory details all the time. I find it merely disgusting. Not educational, not leading people to think "it's wrong to kill someone" at all. Actually if anything I find that in CR and even more so in QoS the idea is "look at how this guy is good at killing people, isn't this cool!!". I really see complacency in violence and death. (except Vesper's obviously). I find they just show him as an incredibly effective, soulless killing machine. Without all the other characteristics. And for my idea and my like, that is just not James Bond.
One of the reasons why I like Bond movies is that they never indulged in too many details over violence and never took themselves too seriously even when killings were involved. It's supposed to be entertainment. And I'm not OK with overly violent movies in general, I just don't go watch them. This last two Bond ones really take the thing WAY too far in my opinion, and I don't like it one bit. Also bearing in mind that this is James Bond. It's not cultural, it's not Akira Kurosawa.. it's just an action flick.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
Alessandra -
Agree to disagree? )
I guess I just want a Bond that takes itself seriously, and you don't, which is PERFECTLY fine, and probably more respectable than my view, anyhow.
The one question I want to ask is about the books - I've read most of them, and I'm pretty sure literary Bond takes himself pretty seriously. Loeffs can probably have this argument with you better than I can, but I find a lot in common with Craig's Bond and Fleming's Bond, despite the physical difference that I think we've all beaten to death in this thread. )
Comments
But yes, this thread should now continue as a base for reviews only.
I'm not sure if you're referring to me, M5, but if so, I want to clarify that it was intended to be purely in fun; merely pointing out that the new film wasn't a complete failure there:
http://www.ajb007.co.uk/index.php?topic=31664&cpage=3
The rest of that post was a deliberately Craig-deprecating remark about lovely Italian women finding him unattractive....that was when I thought there was still some fun to be had on this front, though I've obviously since learnt otherwise.
I hereby sincerely apologize---I'm Sorry*---to anyone (especially Alessandra) offended by my quoting Italian box office figures. I'm sure that Italian figures are perfectly in order ;%
* How it's done
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Isn't the line "I'm sure the figures are perfectly rounded".
Yeah...but I'll let you say it B-)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Very funny review.
I don't like QoS either, but I am asking myself, when the last time has been, that you have seen a 007 movie??
Or have you only seen so far the Roger Moore Bonds, which are shown regularly on TV ?:)
Or, maybe you are from California?
http://www.ajb007.co.uk/index.php?topic=31963
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
This may seem odd, but QoS reminds me a lot of Moonraker . . . the book, and that is a good thing.
Both are relatively short. In terms of the villainous plot, almost nothing is as it seems, and in both plots certain details could prove embarrassing for the government. No sex between Bond and the main female characters, who are rather similar to each other. Both are also relatively dark in their overall feel, despite in both, Bond emerging with a successful outcome.
I don't think the action scenes suited his character (in a similar way to a climatic action scene not suiting the character of John McClane in Die Hard 4.0) and I found him to be rather unpleasant. One member noted that he was a cold b****rd, except for me, while Bond is perfectly capable of being a cold b****rd, he is IMO also sympathetic, and in this film, he wasn't.
One of the most disappointing things for me is that, while I wanted to see CR again and was left stunned by its final scene, by the time QOS ended, I was left rather empty and not particularly enthused to see it again (although I undoubtfully will, just not anytime soon.)
Actually I was instead shocked with the box office results, since the second week, QoS was topped at the box office by a ridiculous, lame comic movie starring a famous Italian comic actor and an Italian TV presenter. Which not only is not good in absolute terms as going to see lame Italian comic movies is bad in itself for my nation
I find this a very good point Dan. Guess that is part of what some of us pointed out in term of lack of Bond presence in the movie and lack of Bond elements, but you expressed it better.
You're missing the point. QoS is the kind of movie we should've had after OHMSS. Bond's love, his true love, is dead. He is angry, yet still bound to his duty. He gets his job done, but he shouldn't be all jokes and fun *cough* DAF *cough*.
If your true love was, in effect, cheated and murdered by an organization, would you be off gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget?
I'm not missing the point. I just don't think it's either or. Yes, Bond shouldn't be all jokey, but nor do I think he should be a sociopath whom I grew to dislike. DAF, although I did enjoy it, was completely inappropiate as it should have been a revenge movie. But why go the other extreme? Yes, Bond shouldn't be 'gallivanting happily with a martini in one hand and a bimbo in the other, making jokes about Q's latest gadget' (which is not so bad actually :v) but we should still feel for him. My strongest reaction was that this guy should be in prison. I don't know, I guess it comes down to what we want of Bond. For me, QOS's Bond came too terrifyingly close, and I hate to say it because it's been said numerous times before, to Bourne.
Plus, the other things is, some of the stunts Bond did were IMO beyond his capabilities. The opening chase scene in CR was superb; yet the Bond which executed that arguably would not have been able to execute (no pun intended) some of the stunts in QOS, and QOS began staright after CR.
One final comment; Bond has been ruthless before. He has been cold before. He has been a b*****d before. But I always felt empathy for him as he seemed to me to have a soul and was always extremely sympathetic; in QOS, he comes across to me as too much of a souless killing machine, and a rather unpleasant one at that.
Just because Brosnan made a sly remark after killing twenty people while dual wielding submachine guns in a ridiculous fashion, doesn't give him a soul. At least Craig's Bond actually has to deal with each kill - he bleeds, he hides the bodies, he struggles.
This is a fair point. But this still is a movie (with a lot of things that require suspension of disbelief in it) and he still is James Bond, not an average Joe who can afford the luxury to change character and attitude because someone he loved died. He is a spy and he is supposed to always be who he is, as that's part of his job. Besides "Yes, dammit, I said "was". The bitch is dead now." is how it ends. Not to mention Bond knows Vesper committed suicide, so while it can still be played with him wanting to make the bad guys pay for his torments, there's no reason for him to not be charming and witty with women as he usually does (as that's part of his job, and actually would carry out his revenge more quickly) or to not have Q by his side giving him gadgets, or Moneypenny worrying and fantasising about him.
He must be a sympathetic character because he's the good guy who saves the world from the bad guys, be it for personal reasons or for Her Majesty. And as Dan said, he really is not in this movie. As far as I'm concerned, that is because he lacks the elements that make him who he is, and distinguish him from random badass spies. He seems more like Robocop on a killing spree to me in QoS.
I liked Timothy Dalton as Bond even though he was not my favourite, but I really do like LTK. That's Bond on revenge mode but he is still very sympathetic and not just a robot. Dalton doesn't lack Bond style, he still has the humour, he has Q helping him out and having actually a scene that always makes me laugh when I see it (When Pam fumes because she finds out he's been with Lupe
To make him a Bond on revenge mode it is not necessary to take away all the characteristics that make Bond who he is, and it's not necessary to get to the point where he is unsympathetic, as Dan said.
Then of course, some may prefer it this way. I just happen not to.
The difference, to me, is that the Bond in QoS is a three-dimensional character. You guys may argue that he's one note - revenge, but I think to revert back to playful Bond type after such a devastating moment in his life would be just one-dimensional.
True, but that's not what I'm saying. Connery, Lazenby, Moore and Brosnan all came across to me as professionals who did not enjoy killing but did so as a necessity of their job and only when required. That is why Brosnan's killings of Kaufman and Electra were so shocking to me. With Craig's Bond in QOS, I think he would have, perhaps not enjoyed, but certainly wouldn't have disliked those two kills.
In CR, perhaps, but in QOS?
I guess we see different dimensions of the one-dimensional
That's how I took it too. And frankly, not even in CR I saw him having much of a soul (But I'm one of those heretics who don't like CR
Dan, agreed, the middle ground is definitely the solution
I don't think License to Kill's revenge is equal. Sure, Felix Leiter is his good friend, but a lot of Bond's humor and charm comes where women are involved. In LtK, Bond is avenging a friend, not a lover, and therefore isn't emotionally hampered in the love department. In QoS, his emotional problems are in a different place.
And come on, Dalton's style was pretty awful. Nice tuxes, but his casual wear is just...
Yeh, I don't have a problem with cinematic violence mysef, but there's something unelegant about the violence in QOS.
{[]
He does it when he has to. When he feels he has to for the job, he does. End of story. He was going to kill Vesper in CR when he said "allow me", because his duty is what comples him to kill. But of course he wouldnt enjoy it. The scene where he lets his assailant bleed out after he stabs him in the leg? Struggle. I honestly need to go watch it again (I've been sick, so haven't gotten out to see it a second time), and I'll give more examples.
Man, where is Loeffs when you need his help?
Another place we disagree - I don't believe that showing the horror of killing and the reality of death is tasteless. In fact, I find it having more taste. I don't think killing ten people in a newspaper factory and then joking about printing anything these days is tasteful - making death a joke does not make it tasteful, it just makes it escapist. However, by making death gritty, and dark, and real, we can see that it is something that takes responsibility and struggle.
And actually, I think avenging someone's best friend is a much deeper emotion than avenging a lover. Especially if it's James Bond. Lovers come and go, friends don't. Also, may I point out again that the conclusion is "the bitch is dead" and she committed suicide? Bond knows Vesper committed suicide. Naturally it's the bad guys' fault, but it still doesn't change what the reaction at the end of CR is, he's over it by the end of the book already.
So now he should be in a different place emotionally. I still don't think any of this justifies turning him into Robocop. Besides, it's a movie, it's not real life, and with all the ridiculously implausible things they do (like the pre title scene with places in Italy being hundreds of kilometers far away being presented as if they were one next to the other out of a tunnel, just to cite one), keeping Bond a sympathetic character seems the least to me.
I really do think it's just a matter of preference, and I agree with Dan the middle ground is the best solution. I don't only want the jokes, but I do want the Bond elements that make him who he is in a movie, and not just a random badass. I think Dalton completely achieved that in LTK and I truly enjoyed the movie despite it being "different" from the usual Bond (though I found TLD far from satisfying). I think they went overboard with the Robocop on killing spree concept here. Again, my personal preference.. I do get your point Nightshooter though.
Except it's so unnecessary. You mentioned CR; why kill the bombmaker? And if that was his goal, why not do it earlier? Craig's Bond (particularly in QOS) comes across to me as either very incompetent or extremely callous. Either way, it's not the Bond I know and love.
Considering that he didn't really need to kill him in the first place, it didn't seem like he struggled all that much.
What a double standard you have. Bond killed 25 people in TND. I highly doubt he killed 25 people in QoS.
Bond killed the Bombmaker because it was better than getting captured and letting him escape.
Bond had to kill that guy, because he attacked and tried to kill Bond. Just cause it was a more brutal killing, doesn't make it any different than Pierce Brosnan shooting up random lackeys.
See, I don't see any struggle. I see the same "I need to do it for work" attitude they had before and on top of that, an attitude as in "it's like crushing an object, no difference, who cares if it's human life" , both in CR and in QoS. And that's not the Bond I've read about in the books and loved in the movies. I really just and only see Robocop here.
Besides, it's not like the Bond movies have any educational purpose :O I think the indulgence in such scenes is distasteful, and nothing that makes the viewer think "he shouldn't be killing that person so easily". To me, they're just indulging in details because with all those CSI etc series now people see the gory details all the time. I find it merely disgusting. Not educational, not leading people to think "it's wrong to kill someone" at all. Actually if anything I find that in CR and even more so in QoS the idea is "look at how this guy is good at killing people, isn't this cool!!". I really see complacency in violence and death. (except Vesper's obviously). I find they just show him as an incredibly effective, soulless killing machine. Without all the other characteristics. And for my idea and my like, that is just not James Bond.
One of the reasons why I like Bond movies is that they never indulged in too many details over violence and never took themselves too seriously even when killings were involved. It's supposed to be entertainment. And I'm not OK with overly violent movies in general, I just don't go watch them. This last two Bond ones really take the thing WAY too far in my opinion, and I don't like it one bit. Also bearing in mind that this is James Bond. It's not cultural, it's not Akira Kurosawa.. it's just an action flick.
Agree to disagree?
I guess I just want a Bond that takes itself seriously, and you don't, which is PERFECTLY fine, and probably more respectable than my view, anyhow.
The one question I want to ask is about the books - I've read most of them, and I'm pretty sure literary Bond takes himself pretty seriously. Loeffs can probably have this argument with you better than I can, but I find a lot in common with Craig's Bond and Fleming's Bond, despite the physical difference that I think we've all beaten to death in this thread.