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
Neither was there any in DN until far later. And in TLD, when was it?
???? Have you seen CR? Is this a joke?
Craig and Dench put in performances that elevate above the script. Craig is out for revenge for the death of his first love, but he brings a tameness to the role to balances his desire to bring his enemies to justice with the cool-headedness necessary for cracking the organization. Dench's M is caught between a rock and a hard place between her newfound faith in Craig after proving his worth in CR and the political pressures that force her to hunt him down.
Camille and Mathis work wonderfully to show the evolution of Craig's Bond. Camille especially is a unique character because she is a Bond girl who is not primarily included as a love interest. Perhaps it is her character who tames Bond for the job that needs to be done. He needs her to get to Greene and yet she is going through a similar struggle as Bond that unites the two of them. Mathis shows the vulnerability of Bond and the loneliness of the character, both in the scene on his private plane and his death.
The opera scene is one of the greatest in recent Bond history and it offers probably the only moment in the film where it felt like the plot had multiple villains. The plot in general is underrated and ahead of its time. Water supply is going to be a major global issue in the future and this film uses it to anchor Greene's plan to manipulate the government of Bolivia. The last scene where Bond encounters Yusef is another high point and leaves the film on a good note. I just wish they would have explored Bond's discovery of his identity and location throughout the film so it wouldn't have felt like a cutaway at the end.
It's an opinion. @chrisisall has been around these boards long enough to be respected for his.
1. Craig
2. Well-coordinated action/fight sequences, especially between Bond and Slate.
3. Tosca scene, including the arrival set to "Night at the Opera"
4. Desert walk scene between Bond and Camille with Arnold's Flamenco guitar soundtrack in the bg
5. Climactic scenes at the Paranal observatory (remote hotel)
(In all, the locations are terrific!)
6. Gemma Arterton
7. Greene is a creepy villain
Cons:
1. Too much action...missed opportunity between Bond and Camille on the plane. Some snappy dialogue suddenly gets cut off so we can descend into another action sequence
2. Arterton is under-utilized.
3. Convoluted plot that needs several viewings to make sense.
Nice post!
CONS: Dominic Green, in a word.....forgetful.
I agree. QoS has plenty of faults but Haphazard went overboard with his criticism. I actually rate QoS fairly highly.
What he says about Greene and the Bond girls is very difficult to defend. Greene has an introduction that is no different than Goldfinger's for instance. And his suggestion of eliminating the Bond girl altogether from QOS so as to not cheapen the previous Vesper storyline is laughable: he himself complains that QOS does not feel like a Bond movie, how would he think the movie feel like without Bond girls? Bond would look like a grieving puritan. In the novels, his grief, present throughout the series, never stopped him from bedding women.
Exactly, bedding Fields (who I actually can't stand as a character - she looks like a strip-o-gram) is him seeking a bit of Solace amidst the anquish.
I don't mind Fields, although she is far from my favourite Bond girl. But yes, bedding her was not the issue, or even an issue. If anything, remove her and Camille, and does that make the film any more Bondian?
For me, the old-school Bond era ends somewhere during or just after LTK. I like LTK, but it definitely marks a turning point. GE up to DAD represent undoubtedly the lowest period in the series IMO. So much so that I don't really consider them Bond films.
I hated Cambell's GE, because it felt like a naff rip off of a Roger Moore Bond film. But then the quality I didn't like about GE (that it didn't feel like a Bond film) was actually an advantage with CR, because he completely wiped the slate clean. QoS continued in a similar vein. I'm yet to decide what I think of Mendes' reintroduction of the traditional tropes and characters. I don't think SF was a huge success on that front, although it could easily have been a lot worse.
QoS will always been one of the films, like LTK that just stands out from the crowd. Like it or loath it, it's different.
Exactly, bedding Fields (who I actually can't stand as a character - she looks like a strip-o-gram) is him seeking a bit of Solace amidst the anquish. [/quote]
I don't entirely buy that. If it had been a bit rawer (i.e. like his shagging of the girl on the beach in SF) I'd be more convinced. Judging by the light tone and the "stationary" line I think it was just meant to be a fun scene for the audience before the serious stuff resumed.
Bottom line for me is that, while I can appreciate it's merits, it's not one I'd chose to re-watch for pleasure. I'd rather watch Moonraker.
Fair enough. I don't turn to any of the Craig films with any great enthusiasm. They're better than the Brosnan films, and I think Craig is a decent Bond. But I don't enjoy them in the same way I do the films up to 1989. Having said that, QoS was the first Bond I'd really enjoyed in the cinema since TLD.
I'm really hoping that Mendes delivers something special with SP. As with SF, a lot of the stars seem aligned but after the disappointment of SF I am not holding my breath. I still think EON's biggest problem is the quality of the writing. This has actually been the Achilles Heal of the series since GE. Weak stories, poorly written dialogue etc. Craig has helped paper over the cracks because he's a decent actor, but you can't polish a turd, as they say , and P+W have dropped some real stinkers.
Some might think casual racism is funny but then again some of you are wearing rose tinted specs when you watch these films you happily excuse the corny cheesy dialogue, I keep forgetting Richard Maibaum and his co writers are the Shakespeare of the Bond series.
Also watching a 50+ Rog in bed with Kristina Waybourn in OP is just downright creepy and far worse than Bond seducing Severine in SF.
Bond films have had stinkers in them for decades and P&W while guilty are far from on their own in this aspect.
The Bond films are full juvenile tosh it's just the Craig era gets called out on it. I also think most of the dialogue in the Craig era is some of the best of the series, yes some of it's cringe inducing but that is mostly in CR and I'm not sure all that is P&W's fault.
Polishing a turd? Well they've been doing that for decades, the only way I can describe DAF, LALD, MWTGG, MR, OP & VTAK and as for Brosnan era, they couldn't even be bothered to polish them and just presented turds.
The Craig films pitch themselves as a superior product, particularly SF, so they tend to be judged on that basis. Cutting them slack because similar instances are dotted throughout the canon is fine, but then people can't in the same breath deem them as Oscar worthy material. Mendes tried to have his cake and eat with SF, which is why it makes several missteps.
That's my point. You could polish the Maibaum scripts. Some them may have been off the cheese-o-meter, but the underlying story and enough of the dialogue still passed muster. The Brosnan stories and scripts were just plain awful. Thing have picked up a little during the Craig era, thanks to Haggis mainly. Although Not sure Logan brought much to SF, apart from perhaps Silva's entrance speech.
Fields was sent (not by M) to seduce him and thus persuade him to return on a flight home. Unfortunately, those who hatched that plan thought Bond was an idiot. Hence, why Fields showed up in a raincoat with nothing on underneath and a reservation at a flea bag hotel. They underestimated Bond.
Instead, Bond turned the tables on Fields. He let her "do her job" but instead he used sex (and an opportunity to attend Greene's party) to keep her from reporting him.
just brilliant =D>
I thought that scene was handled quite tastefully. It's not until AVTAK where things start to become uncomfortable.
It's certainly more tasteful than shagging a woman who was a sex slave and quite clearly scarred by it.
"I can't seem to find the... stationary...
could you help me look?"
Also didn't mind Moore bedding Waybourn at all. That scene is handled pretty well and doesn't require you to laugh at it (it's the dialogue between the two, and Moore's acting, that'll get the laughs).
Also, all of the Tosca stuff is superb. It's art-house Bond done right. Even like the silent chase. The cinematography throughout is very good as well. The camera actually captures things that matter and they're edited in a coherent fashion.
:)>-
1 Daniel's Bond. I really like the fact that, on the one hand, Bond is clearly vulnerable and his words are few and well chosen, yet on the other hand, he is physically intense and explosive. To me this makes him a more believable and deep character. He also looks the 'coolest' in this film.
2 Sight and sound: the locations are all gorgeous and the soundtrack has some superb tracks on it which elevate the action - Time to get out, the palios, no interest in Dominic Greene, night at the opera, the list goes on.
3 It is brave. Whether you think the four elements thing is cliche or not, this film tries to do things that previous Bonds haven't - the integrating of the background at Tosca and Siena, the running time is cut substantially to emphasise the pace of the film, the water idea is forward thinking, the 'platonic' character of Camillle, the shunning of the tick a box Bond elements in favour of what suits the character. I like that QoS is not paint by numbers.
4 Felix and Mathis. Two of my favourite characters return. Would love to see more of Jeffrey Wright, I think his interpretation of Felix is a perfect match for Craig's Bond. As for Giannini, personally he steals every scene he is in, and there is a tragi-comic element to his character throughout both films.
Are there reasons to criticise QoS? Probably. People have said the movie is no fun, or is it derivative, or the plot is not fully developed. What I see is a non-stop thrill ride that complements the two epics (CR, SF) before and after it.
inb4 "It's symbolic for Bond's emotional state." If it is, I still don't like the locations.