It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Agreed. Good post.
:))
And when you say "messaging" what do you mean? Like, there's a 'message' in the film that we shouldn't do bad stuff? And if that's the case, is that in and of itself a bad thing? Or a bad message? Why can't people just take it in without labelling it?
I watched the original Red Dawn & enjoyed it as an adventure. I watched Silent Running & enjoyed it as a science fiction. Neither pissed me off regardless of my political beliefs... :-??
But, as always, politics (like religion) cannot be discussed in any other way but HOT. I always try to see if it can be done in fun,... like a fool.... :-??
But (geeze I just can't help it, heh heh), isn't EVERY film & work of fiction 'political' in some way then? Isn't How the Grinch Stole Christmas a Socialist cartoon? Isn't Enter The Dragon a Right Wing message? What about Firefly/Serenity- a whole frikin' mish-mash of conflicting political statements???
To capture the nuance we'd like to incorporate into our communications, we'd have to write like we were writing full-on novels, and who has time for that?
-Chris
Morally lost for not looking at the big picture? I took it as a comment on the fact the US and CIA are always fully aware of the 'big picture', but continue to act immorally, or at best solely in their own interest, but apparently on behalf of others.
:))
Well it's a case of the lunatics running the asylum across the globe. Some are just bigger lunatics than others. And others are puppets for the lunatics. It's lunacy, I tell you!
In QOS, they don't. The take questionable decisions out of self-interest, yes, but also of ignorance: they do not know Greene belongs to a secret organization that organized a terrorist attack on US soil not long ago, and may even have been instrumental to 9/11 (according to CR). Beam fails to recognize a crook, something Felix Leiter, however, sees right away.
The way I read it was that Beam was perfectly aware of Greene's nefarious acts, but didn't really care as they were of no immediate threat and would be worth keeping sweet, no matter their history. Wouldn't be the first time the US had courted terrorists. I can see how you would also come to the conclusion that he's ignorant and I'm not saying you're wrong, I just assumed that Quantum don't fit the profile Du Jour for terrorists and thus there is no pressing need to mount serious operations against them. If they'd been a bunch of middle eastern blokes they'd be ripe for the picking, no matter their political persuasion. As it stands they're a bunch of seemingly politically neutral Caucasians blokes. I'll keep this in mind the next time I watch, like I said, it's just the way I took it.
I think Beam doesn't care about Greene's motives as long as they do not clash with the interest of his boss, which is in this case good old US of A. Which is basically his job, protecting the interests of the USA in a way he thinks would be best or his boss tells him is best. Beam is like Bond a tool to obtain a result.
In that sense the script of QoB was actually quite good and subtle in making Greene & Quantum the baddies and Beam as well but with a different agenda.
In the hands of a decent director with more vision and talent QoS could have been a contender.
Quantum is the baddie with Greene as a front.
Like Hitler.
Hitler combined both. Tight, effective methods, planning with a very high success rate of results.
His longterm planning kinda sucked though. :D
Watched QoS again last night and came away thinking this is a much better film than I have previously given credit. The PTS and title song are immediately off putting, but
I watched the opening chase in slo-mo, which made it a lot more tolerable. For me, the editing is the main problem. Get passed those scenes that you almost cannot focus on and it's a good film.
Greene is the type of villain LeChiffre was. Not some think 100 moves ahead like Silva.
I think killing off Mathis was a mistake.
This film moves up on my list.
In fact it's a shame ( due to the writers strike no doubt) that they didn't
Expand on Greene, who seemed an interesting villain , who I'd liked to
Have seen more of.
Daniel Craig is also very impressive, a great actor who's also good
At the physical stuff. :)
Totally agree. Given the circumstances Forster did a decent job. Some parts, like the plane and the ending in the desert don't work that well, but I like a lot of the film. I wish Forster had immersed himself more in Bond - in interviews he seems to know nothing about the other films.
Having said that, and despite this flaw (that cannot be blamed on the team because it was outside their control) they delivered a very coherent script and a movie that is going to be seen in a new light post-SP, as details of the Quantum story are likely to be filled in.
As it stands, the movie is very entertaining and is a slow burner, similar to LTK. First watch is just meh, but on repeated viewings, the sheer brilliance of some of it becomes more apparent.
In particular the cinematography, colours & artsy feel (unlike any other Bond film before) are standouts. Arnold's score is his best work IMO. Craig is in excellent, intense, sophomore form and cements his interpretation of Bond. The supporting cast (Greene, Kurylenko, Giannini, Wright, Arterton, Barbour) are all in fine form. Even Dench is not as annoying as in previous films or as in SF.
Given what they were up again, the team really delivered. I'd love to see a re-edited version where we can actually make out what's going on in the action scenes. I also wouldn't mind Forster back for one more, as long as we have a new action editor.
Truly underrated.
:)>-
I'd actually argue that QoS has some of the strongest character development of the entire series, especially where Bond is concerned. He learns so much from Mathis, M and the memory of Vesper in the film that by the end he's very much a different man than before, more in line with the agent we all know and love. I also love the dialogue of it, drama, comedy and all.
OMG, are we a sub-group of born-again QOSers?