Anyone prefer this to Casino Royale?

I know in time that Casino will grow on me, but right now I prefer Quantum. I'm getting over some pretty dreary years in my life, so I felt the overwhelming slowness and downbeat energy of Casino too be a bit much. I respect that they kicked off Craig's era commanding seriousness and respect, but it seemed too calculated almost. The way it tried to capture the class and attitude of the 60s annoyed me. The 1960s films have their own niche, so I really want to see a 21st century version of my hero. I got that from Quantum.

I enjoyed "Quantum" because it reminded me of my first memories of Bond as a young boy (Roger Moore's films and the "James Bond Jr." cartoon). It was just a string of action scenes (revolutionary and fantastic ones!!!) with head-scratching dialogue and unintentionally hilarious bits like James Bond opening a parachute literally 10 feet from impact and surviving :))

Quantum has some legitimate greatness though. The lead actress I thought was gorgeous and unique for the series in comparison to the Vesper Lynn actress. The first-person action is very modern and the breakneck editing reminds me of old 60s action, think the opening of "Thunderball". The rooftop chase and gun fight was beautifully choreographed and felt like a suspenseful chess game compared to recent Bond action sequences. I think that the cinematography in this one is the best yet in the series. Also, Craig seemed way more likable in this one than in Casino. In Casino, I really wouldn't have cared for the character if I hadn't been familiar with him already. And the sets and locations are beautiful!

Bond films have always been thriller or action. There's the distinction between Casino and Quantum. Casino went for thriller, but felt weak in that regard. Not suspenseful or atmospheric and multidimensional. Quantum is a valid action movie to me. It set its sights lower and came out as fun and light. I'm hoping Daniel Craig is just warming up and has a real classic in his future

Comments

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,697MI6 Agent
    Hi JBjr, I do prefer CR to QOS. Simply because it had better editing and a more thought out script,although I do think CR was about 20 minutes to long,(Just my opinion) but welcome on Board.I know QOS has many fans here at AJB. :)
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    I liked Casino Royale a lot, but I agree with TP about the length. It feels like it is in three main parts, and the post casino is long. QOS is good for the most part but I don't like the shaky-cam or the villain. Welcome by the way. -{
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • JamesBondJuniorJamesBondJunior Posts: 67MI6 Agent
    Thank you both for the welcoming. Been meaning to join a Bond site for over a decade. The villain in Quantum is probably the most forgettable villain I can almost think of. Yes, CR is too long winded for me. I think I have to get used to the idea of a oo7 film without a brisk pace. QOS had enough ADHD to make up for that.
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 9,193MI6 Agent
    Tony DP likes this one over CR too if I recall.

    Certainly the early stuff in Siena are like the Roger Moore in MR days a bit. I think CR might have worked better as a serial or three parter not that I'm seriously advocating that, but it seemed written for an HBO serial where you have time to get to know that characters and feel a genuine sense of betrayal at the end. I felt the same about The Dark Knight, it just felt crammed in.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • SilentSpySilentSpy Private Exotic AreaPosts: 750MI6 Agent
    No. Casino Royale is almost a classic Bond film. Quantum of Solace is an action movie. And not a very good action movie or one that I can sit down and watch.
    "Better late than never."
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    SilentSpy wrote:
    No. Casino Royale is almost a classic Bond film. Quantum of Solace is an action movie. And not a very good action movie or one that I can sit down and watch.

    I think both are action movies.


    Quantum ranks as one of the worst Bonds IMO, right behind Die Another Day and The World is Not Enough.
  • bluemanblueman PDXPosts: 1,667MI6 Agent
    Prefer the very tight writing/action of QOS to CR's more awkward two-act structure. QOS hits what it aims at (for me a very Fleming Bond film even with all the action scenes), CR comes close (no Vesper till the halfway point hurts it IMO).
  • JamesBondJuniorJamesBondJunior Posts: 67MI6 Agent
    blueman wrote:
    Prefer the very tight writing/action of QOS to CR's more awkward two-act structure. QOS hits what it aims at (for me a very Fleming Bond film even with all the action scenes), CR comes close (no Vesper till the halfway point hurts it IMO).

    I agree, blueman. I think QOS will age well like FYEO and other sort of less-ambitious, but less pretentious Bond films. I do feel its more Fleming in spirit, even though it isn't in style or subject. Feels like a bunch of fun short stories put together. Though, I'll admit, they are sort of cobbled together.
  • 007DAN007DAN CheshirePosts: 97MI6 Agent
    JBJ, I'm with you on this, QoS to date is my favorite Bond film. Everything about it i just love, in fact, it was the film that tipped me over from being an everyday Bond fan to actually wanting to live the Bond Lifestyle and doing something about it.
    Of course you are
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 9,193MI6 Agent
    _39205140_ericmorecambe203.jpg

    "This boy's a fool!" :))
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • SpectreBlofeldSpectreBlofeld AroundPosts: 364MI6 Agent
    My only beef with QoS was that it was too damn short. It needed some filler scenes - more establishing shots, setting up the scenery, putting us in the locations. We were whisked off from place to place too quickly and had no breathers between scenes. It's almost like they felt like they were making up for the fact that Casino Royale was so long by making QoS so short.
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    blueman wrote:
    CR comes close (no Vesper till the halfway point hurts it IMO).

    I agree that was pretty dumb. They should have dumped the whole "find the phone to sniff out the terrorist" plot. My ideal verison of Casino Royale would have Bond go straight to the Casino after the PTS.
  • SilentSpySilentSpy Private Exotic AreaPosts: 750MI6 Agent
    Ricardo C. wrote:
    SilentSpy wrote:
    No. Casino Royale is almost a classic Bond film. Quantum of Solace is an action movie. And not a very good action movie or one that I can sit down and watch.

    I think both are action movies.


    Quantum ranks as one of the worst Bonds IMO, right behind Die Another Day and The World is Not Enough.

    But I see a difference between action movies and Bond movies. There are a lot of standard shoot, blow stuff up, and have hot girl action movies. Bond movies are something more special. I like The World is Not Enough and it's Brosnan's best to me. It still has a few too many action scenes however. But it feels like Brosnan is fully in the Bond role. Tomorrow Never Dies was an action movie right after Bond drives the BMW off the roof. The first half was ok. Goldeneye is good but doesn't really sound and at times feel like a Bond movie. Die Another Day is best forgotten as is Quantum except for a few car scenes and music elements.

    Casino Royale really becomes a Bond movie as soon as you see that train shot. I did feel that the producers and everyone involved with the story weren't exactly sure what a 00 should be doing. For example, Bond probably shouldn't be working with a partner in the opening scene. But they needed a hook to start the chase and probably didn't want to make Bond loose his cover. So, the first part of Casino Royale was a bit strange. But we see do Bond becoming Bond, so it's ok. The finding Dimitrios, beating him at cards, taking his wife, and knife fight are all classic Bond stuff.

    With Quantum, they made an action movie with Bond elements. Because they didn't know the type of Bond Daniel Craig should be.
    "Better late than never."
  • JamesBondJuniorJamesBondJunior Posts: 67MI6 Agent
    I see your point and you put it eloquently, but I actually see QOS as more of a Bond film than CR. Its more focused on action and style, but it feels like a new kind of Bond film. The whole thing felt like the classic Bond formula that's been absent, just updated and on steroids. I see CR as James Bond the character in a non-Bond kind of suspense thriller. Sort of reminded me of the Jack Ryan films of the 90s, but with tuxedos and more espionage elements. Which is good, because every friend of mine who hated James Bond films before loved CR because of its freshness.
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    edited November 2010
    SilentSpy wrote:
    But I see a difference between action movies and Bond movies. There are a lot of standard shoot, blow stuff up, and have hot girl action movies. Bond movies are something more special. I like The World is Not Enough and it's Brosnan's best to me. It still has a few too many action scenes however. But it feels like Brosnan is fully in the Bond role. Tomorrow Never Dies was an action movie right after Bond drives the BMW off the roof. The first half was ok. Goldeneye is good but doesn't really sound and at times feel like a Bond movie. Die Another Day is best forgotten as is Quantum except for a few car scenes and music elements.

    TWINE,TND, GE, are all action films but they just stick in the superficial Bond elements. Spefically regarding TWINE, Bond in that movie was a whipped pansy as well as every one else that film. EVERYONE felt bad about their actions, excluding the silly Elektra King. The series lost it's identity after The Living Daylights when it all but broke away from attempting to make this series spy thrillers.
    Casino Royale really becomes a Bond movie as soon as you see that train shot. I did feel that the producers and everyone involved with the story weren't exactly sure what a 00 should be doing. For example, Bond probably shouldn't be working with a partner in the opening scene. But they needed a hook to start the chase and probably didn't want to make Bond loose his cover. So, the first part of Casino Royale was a bit strange. But we see do Bond becoming Bond, so it's ok. The finding Dimitrios, beating him at cards, taking his wife, and knife fight are all classic Bond stuff.


    I never thought much of the "Bond" stuff in Casino Royale. Really, that whole foiling the Ellypsis thing was pretty much a retread of Thunderball. Bond's character also dosen't seem to be "Bond", yeah stick some of the culture into him but that dosen't make him Bond and really it's a whole cheat of character development. They already gave him the one-liners and the taste in food and woman and never even touched on the self conflict from the novel. CR is a good action film, not a Bond film.
  • mrbain007mrbain007 Posts: 393MI6 Agent
    Ricardo C. wrote:
    SilentSpy wrote:
    But I see a difference between action movies and Bond movies. There are a lot of standard shoot, blow stuff up, and have hot girl action movies. Bond movies are something more special. I like The World is Not Enough and it's Brosnan's best to me. It still has a few too many action scenes however. But it feels like Brosnan is fully in the Bond role. Tomorrow Never Dies was an action movie right after Bond drives the BMW off the roof. The first half was ok. Goldeneye is good but doesn't really sound and at times feel like a Bond movie. Die Another Day is best forgotten as is Quantum except for a few car scenes and music elements.

    TWINE,TND, GE, are all action films but they just stick in the superficial Bond elements. Spefically regarding TWINE, Bond in that movie was a whipped pansy as well as every one else that film. EVERYONE felt bad about their actions, excluding the silly Elektra King. The series lost it's identity after The Living Daylights when it all but broke away from attempting to make this series spy thrillers.
    Casino Royale really becomes a Bond movie as soon as you see that train shot. I did feel that the producers and everyone involved with the story weren't exactly sure what a 00 should be doing. For example, Bond probably shouldn't be working with a partner in the opening scene. But they needed a hook to start the chase and probably didn't want to make Bond loose his cover. So, the first part of Casino Royale was a bit strange. But we see do Bond becoming Bond, so it's ok. The finding Dimitrios, beating him at cards, taking his wife, and knife fight are all classic Bond stuff.


    I never thought much of the "Bond" stuff in Casino Royale. Really, that whole foiling the Ellypsis thing was pretty much a retread of Thunderball. Bond's character also dosen't seem to be "Bond", yeah stick some of the culture into him but that dosen't make him Bond and really it's a whole cheat of character development. They already gave him the one-liners and the taste in food and woman and never even touched on the self conflict from the novel. CR is a good action film, not a Bond film.

    Whilst I can understand ur arguments for DAD and QoS as being 2 of the worst Bond films, I'm afraid I flat-out disagree abt TWINE. IMO, despite the presence of Denise Richards I thought TWINE was a pretty good Bond film. I certainly never had a problem treating it as such when watching it.. I liked the character of Electra and I liked the way you didn't know straight away who the main villain was. You seem to suggest that TMWTGG and DAF are more enjoyable films. Sorry but...no! Those 2 really are 2 of the weakest of the series and are more campy comedies than Bond flicks.
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    edited November 2010
    mrbain007 wrote:
    Whilst I can understand ur arguments for DAD and QoS as being 2 of the worst Bond films, I'm afraid I flat-out disagree abt TWINE. IMO, despite the presence of Denise Richards I thought TWINE was a pretty good Bond film. I certainly never had a problem treating it as such when watching it.. I liked the character of Electra and I liked the way you didn't know straight away who the main villain was. You seem to suggest that TMWTGG and DAF are more enjoyable films. Sorry but...no! Those 2 really are 2 of the weakest of the series and are more campy comedies than Bond flicks.

    TWINE's so called "emotional" element was trite. Something you find out of American TV soap operas. I was laughing when Elektra was screaming after she was traped in the avalanche and declaring her "evilness" when she was talking about the oil to Bond. Then the biggest problem was the plot, it made the convoluted Living Daylights seem simple to follow. A very stupid film IMO with characters walking around moaning about their actions. This film pretended it had substance.

    And yes I do think Golden Gun and Diamonds are better films because they have better dialogue, better characters, and certainly one superior villian. They aren't very good thrillers but their entertainment value eclipses the inept TWINE.
  • JamesBondJuniorJamesBondJunior Posts: 67MI6 Agent
    I think that TWINE is not a great movie. But it has its moments though. Especially, as a film where M and Bond's relationship is center stage. I thought Pierce was wonderful in it and I really cherish Q's classy departure from the series. And I think Goldeneye was the best action movie of the 90s AND a great Bond film. I'm sure others will disagree.

    I agree that DAF is awesome. The only weaknesses I can find in it are the weak action scenes (the crappy moon buggy part) and maybe the fact that people were used to a classier, more polished tone to the lighter, sleazier Vegas story. I think that this was intentional as the scenes not in Vegas (Wint and Kidd in Africa, the Amsterdam scenes and the opening) are INCREDIBLE Bond moments. I have no opinion on the TMWTGG because I haven't watched in a long while.

    CR is a superior romantic/thriller. It seemed like a better and more mature version of that silly Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie spy film. I think if QOS had been tweaked and perfected, it could have been worthy enough to be Craig's first film. The movie grows on me the more I watch it.
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    edited November 2010
    I think that TWINE is not a great movie. But it has its moments though. Especially, as a film where M and Bond's relationship is center stage. I thought Pierce was wonderful in it and I really cherish Q's classy departure from the series. And I think Goldeneye was the best action movie of the 90s AND a great Bond film. I'm sure others will disagree.

    I agree that DAF is awesome. The only weaknesses I can find in it are the weak action scenes (the crappy moon buggy part) and maybe the fact that people were used to a classier, more polished tone to the lighter, sleazier Vegas story. I think that this was intentional as the scenes not in Vegas (Wint and Kidd in Africa, the Amsterdam scenes and the opening) are INCREDIBLE Bond moments. I have no opinion on the TMWTGG because I haven't watched in a long while.

    CR is a superior romantic/thriller. It seemed like a better and more mature version of that silly Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie spy film. I think if QOS had been tweaked and perfected, it could have been worthy enough to be Craig's first film. The movie grows on me the more I watch it.


    James Cameron. That's all I need to say.

    As for DAF's action, I actually enjoyed it on the whole. My favorite chase scene was the Moon Buggy because it was just plain hilarous and it's obviously not meant to be viewed with a straight face. The finale was the major problem though because it was very mundane and felt like there was no direction occuring.
  • bluemanblueman PDXPosts: 1,667MI6 Agent
    Ricardo C. wrote:
    blueman wrote:
    CR comes close (no Vesper till the halfway point hurts it IMO).

    I agree that was pretty dumb. They should have dumped the whole "find the phone to sniff out the terrorist" plot. My ideal verison of Casino Royale would have Bond go straight to the Casino after the PTS.

    I wouldn't have minded maybe 20 minutes or so of lead up to Montenegro, something like the Sienna beginning from QOS? Structure-wise, the two films aren't that dissimilar, one big difference is we see the villain in CR long before Bond does, which adds to the super-long front part of the film. Well that and the two super-long actiony sequences. ;) That's why for me, QOS's rather more sleek thriller-esque plotting is an improvement over the more cumbersome two-act split/giant set pieces of CR. I like CR, just wish it had one more rewrite.
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,864Quartermasters
    CR, to me, shares a structural flaw with the novel---a protracted coda. Never really minded it too much.

    I'd give CR the edge over QoS, simply because I enjoy the pacing of CR and didn't mind its length. QoS could have used a more languid pace during the narrative/character sequences. There's a lot of good stuff there that's just lost in the haste to move onto the next thing. Editing---both camera/shot cuts during action sequences, and cutting dramatic beats short before they pay off---hurt Quantum quite a lot. But I still like it more than many here.

    P.S. Welcome to AJB, JamesBondJunior! {[]
    "Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
    "I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
    "Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
  • JamesBondJuniorJamesBondJunior Posts: 67MI6 Agent
    Thanks and nice to meet you, Loeffelholz! I agree that both films are really neck and neck with each other. And I too look forward to more reasonably long oo7 films.

    Ricardo, "True Lies" was fantastic and the most fun action movie of the decade :D Probably my favorite James Bond/spy film tribute/satire!
  • mrbain007mrbain007 Posts: 393MI6 Agent
    edited November 2010
    Ricardo C. wrote:
    mrbain007 wrote:
    Whilst I can understand ur arguments for DAD and QoS as being 2 of the worst Bond films, I'm afraid I flat-out disagree abt TWINE. IMO, despite the presence of Denise Richards I thought TWINE was a pretty good Bond film. I certainly never had a problem treating it as such when watching it.. I liked the character of Electra and I liked the way you didn't know straight away who the main villain was. You seem to suggest that TMWTGG and DAF are more enjoyable films. Sorry but...no! Those 2 really are 2 of the weakest of the series and are more campy comedies than Bond flicks.

    TWINE's so called "emotional" element was trite. Something you find out of American TV soap operas. I was laughing when Elektra was screaming after she was traped in the avalanche and declaring her "evilness" when she was talking about the oil to Bond. Then the biggest problem was the plot, it made the convoluted Living Daylights seem simple to follow. A very stupid film IMO with characters walking around moaning about their actions. This film pretended it had substance.

    And yes I do think Golden Gun and Diamonds are better films because they have better dialogue, better characters, and certainly one superior villian. They aren't very good thrillers but their entertainment value eclipses the inept TWINE.

    Well sorry but I think we are going to have to disagree on this one. Having re-watched TWINE recently I found to be very entertaining.

    True there are some good scenes in MWTGG but overall I thought the tone of that and DAF were far too tongue in cheek for Bond (and thats from someone that likes Octopussy).
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 25,314Chief of Staff
    I'd give CR the edge over QoS, simply because I enjoy the pacing of CR and didn't mind its length. QoS could have used a more languid pace during the narrative/character sequences. There's a lot of good stuff there that's just lost in the haste to move onto the next thing. Editing---both camera/shot cuts during action sequences, and cutting dramatic beats short before they pay off---hurt Quantum quite a lot. But I still like it more than many here.

    I really can't fault a word of that, Loeff - you've summed it up beautifully -{
    YNWA 97
  • bluemanblueman PDXPosts: 1,667MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    I'd give CR the edge over QoS, simply because I enjoy the pacing of CR and didn't mind its length. QoS could have used a more languid pace during the narrative/character sequences. There's a lot of good stuff there that's just lost in the haste to move onto the next thing. Editing---both camera/shot cuts during action sequences, and cutting dramatic beats short before they pay off---hurt Quantum quite a lot. But I still like it more than many here.

    I really can't fault a word of that, Loeff - you've summed it up beautifully -{
    Ah, and I'm on the other side of it, after so many picturesque Bond "thrillers," just nice to have one where you really feel as if you're there and seeing what Bond sees. The world should go by pretty fast for Bond, at least in one film. But I would imagine 23 will have a different sensibility, bet it gets back to a comparatively statelier CR-type pace.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,697MI6 Agent
    "The world must go by pretty fast for Bond" judging by the editing if QOS is how Bond sees the world he must suffer from Epilepsy. :))
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Sign In or Register to comment.