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
That is all.
It might've been risky but it worked and it's not daft making something relevant to the title. It gives it more meaning if anything. Nonetheless it was a nice homage to Fleming and for me it remains one of the best titles. Besides, for the film's detractors the title wasn't the problem but elements of the film itself. So it's a moot point.
It's the worst title in the series I think. Just because Fleming came up with it, it doesn't make it good.
Risico is a better Fleming title. Just change the organisations name to Risico and it fits.
LOL, Risico is a way better name! SPECTRE's even better, but I'll not go there. ;)
In my opinion, it gives it *less* meaning. Quantum of Solace is the 'measure of comfort' a relationship requires to survive (uh, I think). Quantum of Solace in the context of it being the name of the organisation... makes so sense at all.
Thats it but in the film it refers to how much is left after the Vesper betrayal - nothing to do with the organisation.Barbara Broccoli said so in an interview.
I honestly don't care about the title referencing the whole Vesper arc, it just sounds, crap.
I hope Bond 24 is called Risico.
Yeah, but they were nice suits. Although, not as nice as Craig's. If I had a few extra thousand, I'd buy one of those suits.
It would be like Blofeld/SPECTRE after Diamonds are Forever.
I both agree and disagree.
For me I understood the title to be ambiguous in that it has double meanings. The title obviously referring to the Quantum organization - that is the reinvented notion of SPECTRE in a sense. The title Quantum of Solace to me also referred to achieving solace after Bond avenges the death of his lover and going on a revenge mission after the events that led to the circumstances in which Vesper died - for Quantum of Solace you can read, 'minutiae of appeasement' or 'small measure of atonement' lol - I think the screenplay was so messed about with and befuddled that people get confused with what actually happens in QOS - wherein we learn more of Quantum, Bond seeks to avenge his lovers death by seeking revenge on key figures of Quantum - he eventually tracks down Vesper's 'boyfriend'.
Quantum felt a bit like a fill in for SPECTRE to me. I really expected SPECTRE to come back after CR.
I'm not saying they should bring back SPECTRE but them returning would create a huge buzz for the film that Quantum wouldn't. The media would be all over Blofeld coming back.
I think Blofeld should come back but as a reimagined solo villian.
SPECTRE shouldn't return, and Quantum can just be dropped. We don't need an organisation.
yes I think Quantum will definatly be picked up again in Bond 24.
But you can't reimagine Blofeld? He is Spectre through and through which is why he is so iconic. If you did then people would most likely say he is not as good as the original established idea of who Blofeld is.
Well he didn't work with SPECTRE in DAF and SPECTRE weren't there in OHMSS either.
I don't mean change him completely, he can still have his cat and everything, just try not to make him too Dr Evily.
People keep saying this - and though there is some potential truth in it - I feel Blofeld could certainly be reimagined and I would yet again cite the character of the Joker and how he has also been reimagined to great effect e.g. Blofeld could be reintroduced as a balding terrorist who wishes to co-opt Quantum to his own ends. Indeed Blofeld has been reimagined within the classic series; from Pleasance's scarred evil genius, to Savallas's pre-scar biochemical terrorist and man of action, to Charles Gray's blond haired facially reconfigured camp monopolist and terrorist - and even Max Von Sydow's Moriarty type take on Blofeld.
I can see the point you make, however its an actor change rather than a charactor change if you understand me? Surgery explains Blofelds transformation for DAF, admittedly the OHMSS Blofeld didn't have a scar and lobes.....etc. But i am sure surgery was alleged at the college of arms? Mind you when Blofeld doesn't recognise Bond becouse of glasses and a pipe? The biggest thorn in his side ever?!!! People wouldn't want Blofeld to change too much if he should ever return?
In the meantime they should persist and return with Quantum with alot more sinister villains! It is possible, i mean imagine it turned Raoul Silva was actually a member of Quantum. So i think we should allow Quantum to develop and see where we end up. Blofeld should not return atleast during the Craig era, especially seeing as he is already 3 movies into his tenure.
I also don't think OP was looked down upon on its initial release as most of the audience had been in on the joke that Moore's Bond was knockabout slapstick blended with a touch of melodrama. It was seen pretty much in the same way as an Indiana Jones picture and not to be taken seriously. I don't think OP will ever be put alongside OHMSS as a benchmark Bond.
Now as for QoS, I think it all depends on the tastes of future audiences, though I suspect it will always divide fans.
1) Point out all it's positives like the last scene, etc, while completely ignoring any of it's flaws.
2) Blame the writers strike for all it's flaws.
3) Say Brosnans films were worse and try to derail the thread.
4) Do a balanced defense where you admit it has flaws but explain why you like it.
Unfortunetly, not many people use that last one.
1 - Dan's portrayal as Bond
2 - Bond's relationship with Mathis
3 - Opera scene
If you are that easy to please you must have enjoying all previous 007 movie a lot more since they contained all far more redeeming parts than the two you named. ;)
Corrected your spelling on the last one. And to that, you and others are full of apologies yourselves while trying to put a pile of excrement (thanks Steve for the borrow ;) ) like DAD or the overly melodramatic and poorly written soap opera TWINE over QOS. I read your further defense of the first half of DUD and laughed myself silly, which is fine because I always appreciate comedy as priceless as that. I'll miss all the laughs I get out of this place the next few weeks. No matter how you want to slice and dice it, QOS has very valid excuses which DAD and TWINE do not which explain why it is generally considered an inferior effort, which I would never disagree with. I equally don't get why some rank it highly, but what I do know is that like OHMSS and LTK before, it is not as bad as it's made out to be and I'll bet some years from now many of you will mellow a bit towards it in the same way.
I could add a lot more things not mentioned on to a list of QOS positives such as the Kabira interrogation and Bond's return to M's favor and expectations in the end, and a great finale at the Perla with all it's psychological implications as examples. One whose positives would double those of DAD for sure.
1) Point out all it's negatives like the last editing, etc, while completely ignoring any of it's positives.
2) Blame Marc Foster for all it's flaws.
3) Say Brosnans films were better and try to derail the thread.
4) Do a balanced defense where you admit it has positive elements but explain why you don't like it.
Unfortunetly, not many people use that last one.
I'll add another one.
(5) Have a complete inability to understand or comprehend that other people like it. They like it for a myriad of reasons and because THEY DON'T LIKE it they expect others to fall in line. Narrow mindedness at its worse.
Well said!
"A pile of excrement" as an argument comes to mind, that combined with reason 5 you are mentioning.
Pot calling kettle black???
I do not like QoB and I do not care if anybody else likes it really because his/her reasons might be valid for them.
But I can easily say that Bond23 has to put in little effort to improve on the "Qualities" of QoB. It would be really impossible to make a poorer entry in the EON franchise if they tried it. (We can always call Forster back 8-X )
Skyfall will easily be better since us 007 fans have been waiting for something half decent since CR.
BOND- QOS. Could have been worse without Craig pretty much carrying the film on his back. No one could save DAD, whether Craig, Brosnan, or the man in the moon.
WOMEN- Tie. Kurylenko over Berry, Pike over Arterton.
VILLAINS- QOS. Amalric's character is weak due to the script, but only Lonsdale's performance can top Stephens for pure ineptitude. The original Moon did a better job.
HUMOR- QOS. Even the few one liners here beat DAD, which is more often unintentionally funny while watching the disaster unfold.
ACTION- QOS gets the better of it.
SADISM- Tie. Neither strikes me as sadistic in an intended manner.
MUSIC- QOS. Even those who dislike Arnold admit this along with TND are better than what DAD presented.
LOCATIONS- Tie. Neither overly impressive in my opinion.
GADGETS- DAD because it has them.
SUPPORTING CAST- QOS due to Mathis being better than anyone in DAD.
QOS scores better in 6 out of 10 categories, 3 ties, only gadgets goes to DAD. Just my opinion, of course, but one I can defend far better than arguments to the contrary.