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
I really don’t care for those films which is weird because I love QOS so much.
On that side note, I have been re-listening to some of the soundtracks and despite the fan distaste for Arnold, he clearly knows how to pull inspiration from Barry and at least in my opinion, upped his game in CR and QOS.
@ToTheRight : The editing of OHMSS was definitly unique (especially for 1969) and innovative ... fast. But the one thing I mind about the editing of QoS is I can't follow who's doing what. Bourne might have had a very fast editing, too - but you could always follow the action and you knew who does what. That's what they failed at in QoS in my opinion. Just a few frames here and there and it would still be fast but you could follow what's going on. I found it frustrating and still do.
In general I agree with you about the running time and the overall pacing though - but some scenes should have taken about 1-2 minutes longer ... like the briefing scene in London with M, "Oil Fields" questioning and also show some scene of Mathis at the Greene Planet party for example. It was doable - the material was there but it all ended on the cutting room floor - which is a shame. I understand what they were aiming at - but they went (slightly) too far, imho.
Definitely! CR was better than his previous works already but the QoS soundtrack was just awesome. When listening to it, I am totally "feeling" the locations and scenes it was written for. Great work.
I´ll never get how one cannot understand what´s going on in QoS´ action scenes, but after the backlash the editing got, I think it´s save to say that worry can be laid to rest forever.
I wholeheartedly agree on the awesomeness of QoS´ visuals! Deakins is a genius, but the end result agrees much better with me in QoS.
Also a lot of the threads that was left unresolved at the end of QOS isn't even unique to that film, that all stated in CR (the presence of Leiter, White, the criminal organization, working relationship between Bond and M). The only notable carryover from QOS that made sense is Tanner, who has since served the same role as M's chief of staff. And now that SP resolved a lot of those threads started in CR, I think the only thing left is the return of Leiter, which I hope B25 does as it would be a nice to see him and Bond paired back for Craig's final film.
Anyway, I think that's why a lot of what was unique to QOS did not carryover, discounting the lukewarm reception to it. Plus, it's been a decade. For 00 agent that's a few lifetimes ago. That's as long a gap as between the first and last Fleming novels.
I think that boat has sailed. It's always going to be a 'what if' question as to the kind of Bond Craig could have been if Mendes hadn't turned back the clock to 1995.
So I'm pretty sure B25 is going to be another play around the 'old Bond' scenario, but hopefully done better than in SF.
I can see someone viewing all the Craig films down the road and finally figuring it out. In fact, I'm pretty sure that my father, who has only seen SP once and hardly revisits films, will only realize all the linkages on a back to back viewing of all Craig films.
Here's the thing, how much of the general public even remembered the name "Quantum"? That was the oddest thing about that QOS, the name "Quantum" only being mentioned twice:
"I'm still not sure that the Tierra Project is the best use of Quantum 's time."
"I told you what you wanted to know about Quantum."
The film never really tries to emphasize that it's their name, it's just mentioned very flatly in matter of fact lines. Otherwise, in most of the film they're generally referred to as "this organization" much like in CR. Unless you're a Bondphile focusing on the minutia, I doubt many really walked out of the film remembering the name of the organization. All they would remember of "Quantum" was that it partly made up one of the oddest Bond movie titles. Contrast that to SPECTRE, where their name is mentioned numerous times and given greater emphasis "SPECTRE. Its name is SPECTRE".
It is kind of odd we don't get that kind of moment with Quantum. I have to wonder if the filmmakers were never entirely satisfied with the name, and intentionally deemphasized it in editing. Had they redubbed those two lines with "our organization", there would have never been any need to try to work in the name Quantum into SPECTRE, they would have easily just been SPECTRE all along.
Yes, it's a valid point and in retrospect was an unfortunate and short sighted mistake on the part of the producers, who should have realized that there was at least the potential to obtain the rights to the Spectre name in the reasonably near future.
As you said, they never mentioned the organization's name in CR and it never took away from the quality of the narrative.
It bugs me as much as the knowledge that a mere typo changed TOMORROW NEVER LIES to TOMORROW NEVER DIES, and the producers decided to go with the typo anyway because it "sounded more Bondian", even though it's nonsensical in relation to the story.
I bet there were a lot of meetings where they sat around trying to think of how they could explain how Quantum became SPECTRE before someone hit upon the bright idea of just completely ignoring Quantum ever existed and assuming (correctly) the general audience would neither notice nor care.
This is why I can't really understand why certain fans are upset that QOS didn't get a "follow up", because Quantum was essentially SPECTRE in all but name. Evil organization that plots world domination, they have moles "everywhere", and it's up to Bond to stop them. The head of Quantum probably would have still been a figure from Bond's past. The only real difference between the two organizations is the name.
Mentioning "Quantum" only twice throughout the movie was clever. It made the organizazion feel mysterious and concealed, whereas saying SPECTRE all the time only downplayed the importance of the organization (which is why Dr. No and Silva only show up very late in the movie and feel scary and elusive, something they could not achieve with Blofeld).
After all M and Mr. White say, respectively:
"What the hell is this organization? How can they be everywhere... and we know nothing about them?"
"You don't even know we exist."
The only reason they had SPECTRE being mentioned everywhere was to remind the audience they were going back to the roots (too bad they didn't do that quality-wise).
And to be fair to the 2015 film, the only characters that actually utter the word "SPECTRE" were the heroes, as they only learned it from Madeline, and they don't utter the name too many times as you imply (it's only four times). In fact, none of the villains ever actually refer to their organization by name at any point in the movie.
As beautiful as she was Gemma is probably too old, though, for her character to return. Camille seems like unfinished business, in need of a mission to find closure. Whatever happened to Guy Haines, did he go underground. Beyond Greene Planet, what other sleeper cells gone dormant in Central and South America could go live with their global plot and SPECTRE pulling the puppet strings. Do the agents Bond took out in the elevator hold a grudge. Did Villiers become a disgruntled employee and take a dark path. Greg Beam could still be killed off or put in jail. Where the heck is Mssr. Mendel and how the hell is he.
From there it just depends on how it's done. There really are a lot of possibilities that don't have to be dire or automatically bad.
EDIT: I was wrong, he doesn't.
So I agree. getting back to a Bond centred movie with Dan on all cylinders would be good.
the rumours suggest it's going to be a broken old bond scenario though
When was that?
I just checked the dialogue transcripit here https://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=spectre
and admittedly I was totally wrong.
Yeah it’s not so much literally continuing from QOS but rather continuing the crime in which those films were made
I can see why they never bring back Bond girls. Natalya in the Paris role would have soured GE retroactively (kind of how the retrofitting of CR-SF in SP does not work).
Better would be if he crosses paths with a Bond girl who survives their second encounter (Camille?), but only as a cameo because each film promotes a new and exciting cast. But does anyone really care about Camille's story at this point?
Leiter is a must for B25.
I couldn't give the slightest toss personally. Why are people always so sure that bringing previous Bond girls back is such a spectacular winning formula?
Bond going off on to do a mission on his own, the GB at the start, some real stunts and no Scooby Gang or dredged up old flames - now that would be compelling.
It seems utterly uninteresting.