Quantum of Solace Appreciation Thread- We Found a Better Place to Meet

1495052545570

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @Legionnaire, I don't know if Haggis and co. wrote CR with the intention of aping Tosca, but the choice of it as the opera of QoS and how it lines up with the former script is interesting. On a recent thread on the forums that compiled pop culture and art references in Bond movies, I wrote a post examining the connections between the first two Craig films and how they connect to Tosca in their narratives:
    Quantum of Solace...

    *Quantum of Solace openly references the three-act Giacomo Puccini play "Tosca," whose plot has connections with the previous film and Bond and Vesper's love and betrayal. One of the climaxes of the play take place before our eyes in Quantum of Solace, as the female lead Tosca (Vesper here) does a deed to save her lover, Cavaradossi (Bond).

    The play itself portrays the crumbling trust of two lovers (Bond & Vesper), and in the plot of the story the female lover is deceived by a powerful man and police chief Scarpia to do his bidding (like Yusef's manipulation of Vesper). A painful scene soon unfolds where the male lover Cavaradossi (Bond) is taken to an antechamber (like the ship barge in Casino Royale) to be tortured by Scarpia, who has deceived Tosca into doing his bidding. Tosca and Cavaradossi briefly speak before the torture begins, and though Cavaradossi experiences untold torture that causes him to scream in high shrills (like Bond's whacking from Le Chiffre) he doesn't give in or let slip the information Scarpia wants, who is looking for a friend of Cavaradossi who also happens to be a political enemy. Tosca is told by Scarpia that her lover's torture will end if she gives them what they want-the location of Cavaradossi's friend, an enemy of the police (the parallel of this being the money from the poker game in the film), which she does after hearing the pain her Cavaradossi is going through (much like the choice Vesper makes to get the money in order to save Bond). As with Bond, when Cavaradossi finds out about his lover's betrayal he is furious, but even in the face of possible death he gloats as Bond does in his torture. Tosca agrees to work at the mercy of Scarpia, and does so only to free Cavaradossi. The lovers meet one last time following Tosca's murder of Scarpia, and they plan their future, plans which are undone when unseen conspiracies kill Cavaradossi and like Vesper, Tosca commits suicide out of grief and emotional turmoil.

    It's a grand thread:
    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/15814/bond-film-statistics-06-popculture-and-art-references-in-the-films-by-all/p8
  • @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, Many thanks for the link. Nice thread and analysis with QoS.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Greene is dead, so who made this? Elvis is my guess.

    http://www.indigometalworks.com
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    As I was saying elsewhere, where we were discussing the visceral action of QoS's action...

    The style of QoS actually reminds me a lot of how Glen cut OHMSS, and how Hunt worked in the early 60s. Obviously the editing of QoS is more rapid, but all three styles favored a quick switch to many different angles on a piece of action, where a cut would happen every second or so on the dime. Many of these cuts would also be framed rather artistically, too. The shots we get of Bond's eyes and surroundings in the QoS opening chase, for example, remind me of how Hunt and his team introduced Bond through the rapid looks at parts of his face while Tracy speeds past.

    The Slate fight feels like a modern version of the little fights in OHMSS too, such as the one with Che Che, another inside Draco's or the one outside the lift of Piz Gloria before Bond makes his way down the mountain. I find comparisons between the Slate and Che Che fight in particular, as Bond does the same move where he smashes the enemy through the decorative little section of what look like tiny doors in both. As with Slate, he also wears Che Che down to nothing, until he just decides to go limp and give up.

    Both films have fighting sequences that are cut quick, but that are artsy and well composed with a lot of wide angles and various shots on the unfolding scrap, with a real punch to the audio and with actors/performers who really look like they are trying to kill each other. That's essentially what makes QoS and OHMSS two of the most successful from an action standpoint: the actors went into it trying to make it look as real as possible, and it's very believable when viewed as George and Dan respectively strike like hell back at their enemies.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 11,425
    As I was saying elsewhere, where we were discussing the visceral action of QoS's action...

    The style of QoS actually reminds me a lot of how Glen cut OHMSS, and how Hunt worked in the early 60s. Obviously the editing of QoS is more rapid, but all three styles favored a quick switch to many different angles on a piece of action, where a cut would happen every second or so on the dime. Many of these cuts would also be framed rather artistically, too. The shots we get of Bond's eyes and surroundings in the QoS opening chase, for example, remind me of how Hunt and his team introduced Bond through the rapid looks at parts of his face while Tracy speeds past.

    The Slate fight feels like a modern version of the little fights in OHMSS too, such as the one with Che Che, another inside Draco's or the one outside the lift of Piz Gloria before Bond makes his way down the mountain. I find comparisons between the Slate and Che Che fight in particular, as Bond does the same move where he smashes the enemy through the decorative little section of what look like tiny doors in both. As with Slate, he also wears Che Che down to nothing, until he just decides to go limp and give up.

    Both films have fighting sequences that are cut quick, but that are artsy and well composed with a lot of wide angles and various shots on the unfolding scrap, with a real punch to the audio and with actors/performers who really look like they are trying to kill each other. That's essentially what makes QoS and OHMSS two of the most successful from an action standpoint: the actors went into it trying to make it look as real as possible, and it's very believable when viewed as George and Dan respectively strike like hell back at their enemies.

    Totally agree. QOS feels closer in style to some of the earlier Bond films IMO. The Campbell and Mendes style is a bit more plodding and stodgy.

    Glen is definitley massively underrated on here. A brilliant orchestrator of action and suspense.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Having just watched the film last night, I agree that it's a very good entry. It does most things right, but Craig's intense performance is at its centre anchoring it. He does an excellent job here of combining that intensity with earnestness & humour. It's never overwrought - just very focused on the goal at hand. Quite frankly, he's very believable as a man on a mission. A man not to be messed with.

    Additionally, one of the things I really like about this film is how vivid everything is. Whether it's the colours, the action, the blood, it's all dialed up compared to prior Bond entries. There is a lot of noticeable 'money up on the screen' too.

    I also like the fact that it's almost anti-American in some ways. The CIA (except for Felix) are portrayed in a less than positive fashion (quite Bourne'esque) and that's the way it should be in my view. Much closer to the reality of things.

    Finally, I like that it doesn't tell us too much along the way. It's all there, but it's not in your face. Therefore, one is likely to learn more about the film each time one watches it. This is certainly the case with me.

    On the negative front, I believe some of the action should have been cut a little differently. It's all well and good to ape the Bourne technique (which was all the rage at the time - I don't agree that this is OHMSS style - it's definitely Bourne that is the influence here imho), but a slightly less frenetic shooting approach would have allowed us to take in some of the locations and scenery better (as we do in OHMSS), most notably in Siena and during the boat chase in Haiti. There are too many wonderful locations which momentarily flash before one's eyes, and that's a waste.

    I like Arnold's score, and think it's his second best after CR's, but still believe this film would have benefited tremendously from Barry style melodic compositions.

    All in all, this is an excellent and quite unique entry in the series. Stylish, glamorous, & also very visceral.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    The Palio by David Arnold is no doubt one of the best bond themes. The drum beat mimics the footsteps of Bond and Mitchell as they chase each other.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Its sitting very happily at #4 on my list @bondjames ..
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'll have to move it up on my next ranking go-around @barryt007. It dropped a bit due to me having such a good time with some of the other films recently, but there's really very little for me to dislike about this entry.

    There's a certain confident intelligence about the script too. It doesn't beat you about the face with obvious exposition but it's there for the taking on repeated viewings.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 19,339
    And you are right about finding little things you had missed on earlier viewings,there is a lot to take in but in the right way.
    It treats the viewer with respect,it's a good 'adult' Bond film,with fantastic dialogue and screen presence by all the cast .

    It also fits the short running time perfectly,it keeps it stream-lined and not a long,bloated affair,meaning it keeps the viewer involved and interested.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    It also fits the short running time perfectly,it keeps it stream-lined and not a long,bloated affair,meaning it keeps the viewer involved and interested.
    I agree and think more Bond films could benefit from a little less bloat as well. This is certainly a trend that Bourne brought into the genre a few years earlier, but QoS benefited from it.

    To me, just like LTK is the visceral & intense 80's Bond film, QoS is the visceral & intense 00's Bond film, and they both benefit from drawing from contemporary trends in film making to give us something quite unique & thrilling.

    Both coincidentally were followed by a long break as well, and their successors were slightly more traditional entries, further magnifying their distinctiveness.

    I'm glad we got one of these types of films for the Craig era, because it suits his interpretation perfectly, just as it did Dalton's.
  • Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    It also fits the short running time perfectly,it keeps it stream-lined and not a long,bloated affair,meaning it keeps the viewer involved and interested.
    I agree and think more Bond films could benefit from a little less bloat as well. This is certainly a trend that Bourne brought into the genre a few years earlier, but QoS benefited from it.

    To me, just like LTK is the visceral & intense 80's Bond film, QoS is the visceral & intense 00's Bond film, and they both benefit from drawing from contemporary trends in film making to give us something quite unique & thrilling.

    Both coincidentally were followed by a long break as well, and their successors were slightly more traditional entries, further magnifying their distinctiveness.

    I'm glad we got one of these types of films for the Craig era, because it suits his interpretation perfectly, just as it did Dalton's.

    Definitely,and they are both films I really enjoy watching..Bond has to work to get his 'win' in the end in both outings.

  • Posts: 489
    I enjoy this film, perhaps just out of my top ten.

    Good Bond film, and without the silliness of Spectre.

    That opening is still astonishing.
  • Posts: 11,425
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    It also fits the short running time perfectly,it keeps it stream-lined and not a long,bloated affair,meaning it keeps the viewer involved and interested.
    I agree and think more Bond films could benefit from a little less bloat as well. This is certainly a trend that Bourne brought into the genre a few years earlier, but QoS benefited from it.

    To me, just like LTK is the visceral & intense 80's Bond film, QoS is the visceral & intense 00's Bond film, and they both benefit from drawing from contemporary trends in film making to give us something quite unique & thrilling.

    Both coincidentally were followed by a long break as well, and their successors were slightly more traditional entries, further magnifying their distinctiveness.

    I'm glad we got one of these types of films for the Craig era, because it suits his interpretation perfectly, just as it did Dalton's.

    100% agree. Mendes inability to edit down his two overblown beasts is a one of my main issues with both of them. Neither film justifies its running time. Perhaps QOS goes too far the other way but at least it leaves you wanting more, not bored.
  • Posts: 1,916
    Is it safe to say QoS has benefited from time and reappraisal? I know I felt somewhat alone in really liking the film from my first viewing and continuing to enjoy and appreciate it on the same level ever since. It felt similar to really still liking LTK when everyone was basking in the flavor-of-the-month GE, such as they were for SF.

    Or is this just the right thread?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    No reappraisal for me. I always thought it was a good film, just not anywhere as good as CR.

    I don't think there has been any positive reassessment amongst the general public. In fact, I believe it's a forgotten entry for many, as is LTK.

    I find it's primarily the hardcore that's looking at it in a new light. The public generally doesn't give 2nd chances.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2017 Posts: 15,713
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't think there has been any positive reassessment amongst the general public. In fact, I believe it's a forgotten entry for many, as is LTK.

    I find it's primarily the hardcore that's looking at it in a new light. The public generally doesn't give 2nd chances.

    It is interesting to think of the reaction to certain aspects of the franchise outside of the hardcore fanbase like we have on this forums. I remember checking a Youtube video of all Bond theme songs from DN to SF a few years ago (maybe 1 year before SP was released). And it was interesting to note that while 'Another Way To Die' generally gets quite a beating on here, there were a lot of non-fans (or casual fans) who commented they either didn't remember the QOS theme before checking the video, or they genuinely thought QOS had no theme song because they had zero recollection of hearing it.
  • Posts: 15,106
    I don't think even OHMSS has received a reappraisal from the general public.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 11,425
    I think you're right. The average member of the movie going public has probably never even heard of it.

    I venture a guess there are only a handful of Bond films most people could name and that when it comes to actors Laz and Dalts are probably not even known/remembered
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    Technically Lazenby is much more known/remembered than Dalton.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    bondjames wrote: »
    No reappraisal for me. I always thought it was a good film, just not anywhere as good as CR.

    I don't think there has been any positive reassessment amongst the general public. In fact, I believe it's a forgotten entry for many, as is LTK.

    I find it's primarily the hardcore that's looking at it in a new light. The public generally doesn't give 2nd chances.

    Yes, yes and yes.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Recently a colleague of mine asked me my favourite Bond film. I replied OHMSS,
    To which he responded " but isn't it supposed to be terrible ?" The urban myth of
    It being a failure, is all many of the public know about it.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Recently a colleague of mine asked me my favourite Bond film. I replied OHMSS,
    To which he responded " but isn't it supposed to be terrible ?" The urban myth of
    It being a failure, is all many of the public know about it.

    We see that all the time. Sheep.
  • Posts: 15,106
    Technically Lazenby is much more known/remembered than Dalton.

    But is OHMSS famous, let alone praised by the general public? I don't think so. I daresay that DAF is still more appreciated by the general public.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Technically Lazenby is much more known/remembered than Dalton.

    But is OHMSS famous, let alone praised by the general public? I don't think so. I daresay that DAF is still more appreciated by the general public.

    You are very much correct, but I was only talking about Lazenby vs Dalton. If you ask random Joe's about the 2 Bond's outside of Connery/Moore/Brosnan/Craig, Lazenby is indirectly well known due to his status as the one-time Bond. Even if they don't remember OHMSS or Lazenby's name, I think it's a pretty well known aspect of the franchise that there is one actor who played Bond only once.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I honestly never get the sense that Bond is well known amongst the public, in the sense that they actually watch the films and have their own opinions. As noted above, OHMSS has failure attached to it because of the bad history it has without Sean as the lead, and because people aren't willing to watch it they know nothing better. I also don't believe for a second that GF is known beyond what people are told to think about it. The really sad thing is, when the public does know a film, they only remember disparate images. A gold girl, a guy throwing a hat, etc. They don't know the true souls of the films, and just go on word of mouth as to what Bond films are best.

    Of course we're all so encyclopedic about this character that anyone seems ill-informed to us. It's just a shame that I have never had the chance to have an actual discussion about Bond beyond a one minute debate I had with my professor at university in between lessons (where I think he actually mentioned OHMSS!), but the conversation was sadly very rushed. The only other time I've talked Bond was with my best friend's dad, during a conversation where we went in depth about what we loved about the films and characters. Those experiences are sadly few and far between.
  • Posts: 1,916
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I don't think even OHMSS has received a reappraisal from the general public.
    It has come a long way in recent years. I heard a stat once that the home video versions of OHMSS have been surprisingly consistent sellers. No, it isn't the top-of-mind selection, but it gets ranked fairly well in some polls I've seen, Naturally you'll get the latest actor ranked near the top any time a new survey is given and the stalwarts like GF, but OHMSS is starting to hold its own.



  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Technically Lazenby is much more known/remembered than Dalton.
    I believe so. Laz took over from Connery at a time when Bondmania was still at its height (although there had been somewhat of a decline from TB to YOLT). So the public was likely very intrigued by the new man at the very least.

    By the time Dalton took over, Bond had been in box office and cultural decline for some time (the genre had moved on). Moreover, there was always the ghost of Brosnan hanging over the proceedings. I believe some viewers just tuned out.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    "Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

    That's how I sort of view this film, I feel like it's running time is perfectly justified and there isn't really a single scene in the movie I would say should be removed.

    To me this movie is top 5 material.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    Also @bondjames, as I said in a previous post, Lazenby has the distinction of being the only one-time Bond in the franchise. And while most may not remember OHMSS or even Lazenby's name, but they know there is one guy who was Bond only once.
Sign In or Register to comment.