Quantum of Solace Editing / Cinematography

2

Comments

  • M16_CartM16_Cart Craig fanboy?
    Posts: 541
    There are definitely really clever shots here. But they're never emphasis. 1 good cut just exists in a sea of thousands of other short cuts.

    For every 1 of those really clever cuts, there's another cut that's totally random (i.e. a shot of a random person in a crowd).
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited November 2021 Posts: 13,901
    Yeah I think it works both ways. A viewer likes a film and they'll make sense of it. A viewer is turned off and dislikes it, they're inclined to pull it apart.

    For example the QOS boat chase and flip of the pursuing craft. I like the film. Visually on screen the pursuing boat is clearly pulled off and flips. I don't need to negotiate and be convinced of that story item that happens in passing. And I'm able to rationalize and resolve it just the same on first viewing, and on closer inspection since.

  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    Genuinely never had any problem following the plot - but also hadn't noticed Bond throwing the oil can at Greene's injured foot! Which proves what people are saying about missing things due to the quick cutting, I guess. Greene was such an oily, slimey, Polanskiesque little weasel, I can just see CraigBond getting some self-amusement by lobbing the can at his crocked ankle. Even if it was unintentional, it worked for the characters and I can see why they kept it in.
  • Posts: 1,394
    QBranch wrote: »
    I think some of the editing is clever though - that which hides nice little (if unimportant) details we can spot on repeated viewings. Like when Bond throws the can of motor oil at Greene's feet. A split second before the shot cuts to the close-up of the can, we see it bounce of Greene's injured left foot. On my first few viewings, it looked like it just hits the ground on the full.

    Pretty rude of Bond not to give Greene a can opener before he leaves.How the hell was Greene supposed to open that thing?😆
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,662
    Haha. It was a ring pull.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    Posts: 7,056
    Venutius wrote: »
    Greene was such an oily, slimey, Polanskiesque little weasel
    Well, at the end he was.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    Oho!
  • M16_CartM16_Cart Craig fanboy?
    Posts: 541
    I rewatched the film last night.

    Actually, I'm okay with the editing in the dialogue scenes. It's just the action scenes that are unwatchable.

    Imagine if the opening car chase, the boat chase and the Mitchell chase, each had an additional minute worth of footage each.

    Yes, the film would be 3 minutes longer, but that's nothing. It would still be a fast-paced film, but you'd actually see what goes on.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    I watched QOS as part of my Silver Aninversary Bondathon. The editing in the action scenes is worse than I remember. It's atrocious. There would be more clarity if I tried to watch QOS, through a brick wall.
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 391
    We should try to write posts in QOS editing style for fun.

    It would be something like:

    Try we posts editing should in write to fun for style QOS.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited November 2021 Posts: 3,154
    M16_Cart wrote: »
    Imagine if the opening car chase, the boat chase and the Mitchell chase, each had an additional minute worth of footage each. Yes, the film would be 3 minutes longer, but that's nothing. It would still be a fast-paced film, but you'd actually see what goes on.
    I'd love that - not because I can't follow what's happening, but because the only thing that could make QOS even better is more of it! ;) In addition to longer action scenes, let's have more of Bond and Mathis on the plane, more of Bond and Felix in the bar and more of Bond and Fields anywhere!
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 1,314
    The film looks like someone tied a go pro to an Alsatian.

    The whole thing is rushed. One minute we’re in London then after 20 seconds of dialogue we’re in the Caribbean or wherever fighting someone we know nothing about, who bond then poses as, gets into a car with a girl we know nothing about who promptly tries to kill him, who then goes to someone else we know nothing about who tries to kill her. She is then given to the second villain we know nothing about, and then bond rescues her for reasons unclear from a boat before handing her over unconscious. Jesus what a mess
  • Posts: 391
    Consider this film a trailer.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    Stamper wrote: »
    We should try to write posts in QOS editing style for fun.

    It would be something like:

    Try we posts editing should in write to fun for style QOS.

    T w pos edi sh i wri t f f st Q.


    Because we get a second, if that, in each shot, before we are thrown the next one.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited November 2021 Posts: 3,154
    Matt007 wrote: »
    The whole thing is rushed. One minute we’re in London then after 20 seconds of dialogue we’re in the Caribbean or wherever fighting someone we know nothing about, who bond then poses as, gets into a car with a girl we know nothing about who promptly tries to kill him, who then goes to someone else we know nothing about who tries to kill her. She is then given to the second villain we know nothing about, and then bond rescues her for reasons unclear from a boat before handing her over unconscious. Jesus what a mess
    Ok, off the top of my head it's like this:
    MI6 have discovered that Mitchell had been using some of the marked money from CR. Slate had popped up on the radar because he'd also been using some of the same money, so there's an obvious connection. Mitchell's dead, so Slate's the only lead they've got. Bond's sent to bring him in. Slate's not to be taken unawares and there's a fight. It's not spelled out that Slate's a Quantum assassin but (show don't tell) he's clearly dangerous so Bond knows he can't mess about and has to kill him. That's the end of the trail unless Bond can find out more about him. Who was Slate in Haiti to kill? And where does Bond go from here?
    Bond puts on Slate's jacket to cover up the blood, so he doesn't look suspicious leaving the hotel. The hotel receptionist can't tell the blond Europeans apart, thinks Bond is Slate and hands him a package. Mystery woman pulls up in a car. Camille's gone to the hotel to meet a geologist who might have information about the area that Quantum are interested in. She's never seen him and doesn't know that Slate's killed him and taken his place. She sees Bond and assumes that the blond Westerner is the geologist. 'Get in' - pause - 'All right' (me, I laughed!).
    Camille doesn't know that Slate was going to kill her - until Bond looks in the case and sees the gun and photo. She catches on quickly, but misconstrues Bond's comment and assumes that he's going to execute her. Camille's unexpected ability to defend herself and get Bond out of the car indicates that there's more to her. Actions reveal character (show don't tell again) and this indicates that she's not just eye candy, there's something deeper at play.
    Bond's not only intrigued by Camille, she's also the only known connection to Slate at this point. Why was Slate sent to kill her? Who sent him? So he has to find out more about her. Bond 'commandeers' a motorbike from someone who's been trailing Camille to make sure Slate did the job (and who also assumes that he's Slate). Craig does his Steve McQueen bit, looks impossibly cool while doing it, follows Camille and she leads him to Greene, the main villain of the piece.
    Greene expected Slate to have killed her, so he's surprised that Camille's alive and demonstrates his ruthlessness by immediately dreaming up an alternative - give her to Medrano, the secondary villain, instead, knowing that Medrano will kill her once he's bored of her. This is what Camille's been waiting for, however, as she's actually been using Greene to get close to Medrano. Bond doesn't know that, however, and, having sussed that Greene's the one who wants Camille dead, Bond decides to interject and save her. At this point, he doesn't know who she is or how closely she's tied to Greene and Medrano, so once he's got her out of danger, he puts her in safe hands and continues the mission, now hunting Greene.
    There you go. It's not that unclear, is it? Or a mess? Really? I'd say it's pretty damn good - I'd want to see that film, man!
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    Matt007 wrote: »
    The film looks like someone tied a go pro to an Alsatian.

    The whole thing is rushed. One minute we’re in London then after 20 seconds of dialogue we’re in the Caribbean or wherever fighting someone we know nothing about, who bond then poses as, gets into a car with a girl we know nothing about who promptly tries to kill him, who then goes to someone else we know nothing about who tries to kill her. She is then given to the second villain we know nothing about, and then bond rescues her for reasons unclear from a boat before handing her over unconscious. Jesus what a mess

    Agree that the first 35 mins are rushed, but once Bond 'rescues ' Camille via speed boat mayhem the film finds it pace and is excellent from thereon in
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    AceHole wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    The film looks like someone tied a go pro to an Alsatian.

    The whole thing is rushed. One minute we’re in London then after 20 seconds of dialogue we’re in the Caribbean or wherever fighting someone we know nothing about, who bond then poses as, gets into a car with a girl we know nothing about who promptly tries to kill him, who then goes to someone else we know nothing about who tries to kill her. She is then given to the second villain we know nothing about, and then bond rescues her for reasons unclear from a boat before handing her over unconscious. Jesus what a mess

    Agree that the first 35 mins are rushed, but once Bond 'rescues ' Camille via speed boat mayhem the film finds it pace and is excellent from thereon in

    I agree with this. QoS is jarring at first, but it settles into a smooth rhythm by the time the main plot kicks in.
  • Posts: 1,314
    Venutius wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    The whole thing is rushed. One minute we’re in London then after 20 seconds of dialogue we’re in the Caribbean or wherever fighting someone we know nothing about, who bond then poses as, gets into a car with a girl we know nothing about who promptly tries to kill him, who then goes to someone else we know nothing about who tries to kill her. She is then given to the second villain we know nothing about, and then bond rescues her for reasons unclear from a boat before handing her over unconscious. Jesus what a mess
    Ok, off the top of my head it's like this:
    MI6 have discovered that Mitchell had been using some of the marked money from CR. Slate had popped up on the radar because he'd also been using some of the same money, so there's an obvious connection. Mitchell's dead, so Slate's the only lead they've got. Bond's sent to bring him in. Slate's not to be taken unawares and there's a fight. It's not spelled out that Slate's a Quantum assassin but (show don't tell) he's clearly dangerous so Bond knows he can't mess about and has to kill him. That's the end of the trail unless Bond can find out more about him. Who was Slate in Haiti to kill? And where does Bond go from here?
    Bond puts on Slate's jacket to cover up the blood, so he doesn't look suspicious leaving the hotel. The hotel receptionist can't tell the blond Europeans apart, thinks Bond is Slate and hands him a package. Mystery woman pulls up in a car. Camille's gone to the hotel to meet a geologist who might have information about the area that Quantum are interested in. She's never seen him and doesn't know that Slate's killed him and taken his place. She sees Bond and assumes that the blond Westerner is the geologist. 'Get in' - pause - 'All right' (me, I laughed!).
    Camille doesn't know that Slate was going to kill her - until Bond looks in the case and sees the gun and photo. She catches on quickly, but misconstrues Bond's comment and assumes that he's going to execute her. Camille's unexpected ability to defend herself and get Bond out of the car indicates that there's more to her. Actions reveal character (show don't tell again) and this indicates that she's not just eye candy, there's something deeper at play.
    Bond's not only intrigued by Camille, she's also the only known connection to Slate at this point. Why was Slate sent to kill her? Who sent him? So he has to find out more about her. Bond 'commandeers' a motorbike from someone who's been trailing Camille to make sure Slate did the job (and who also assumes that he's Slate). Craig does his Steve McQueen bit, looks impossibly cool while doing it, follows Camille and she leads him to Greene, the main villain of the piece.
    Greene expected Slate to have killed her, so he's surprised that Camille's alive and demonstrates his ruthlessness by immediately dreaming up an alternative - give her to Medrano, the secondary villain, instead, knowing that Medrano will kill her once he's bored of her. This is what Camille's been waiting for, however, as she's actually been using Greene to get close to Medrano. Bond doesn't know that, however, and, having sussed that Greene's the one who wants Camille dead, Bond decides to interject and save her. At this point, he doesn't know who she is or how closely she's tied to Greene and Medrano, so once he's got her out of danger, he puts her in safe hands and continues the mission, now hunting Greene.
    There you go. It's not that unclear, is it? Or a mess? Really? I'd say it's pretty damn good - I'd want to see that film, man!

    Yeah I understand all that after multiple viewings but the fact it almost takes longer to read that synopsis that watch the film speaks volumes. Characters need to be introduced with purpose. It’s one too many unknowns and piecing together later that work against the films flow.

    Like you said Camille is bonds one connection to Slate. So it’s incomprehensible that after risking his own life to save her (which makes sense as she is potentially crucial) that he hands her over and walks away.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited November 2021 Posts: 3,154
    I dunno, Matt, I have to say I didn't find any of QOS hard to follow. Lots of people obviously did, though, so maybe there was a bit too much 'show' and not enough 'tell', eh! ;) The thing with Camille after the boat chase is because by that point, Camille's led Bond to Greene - so as far as Bond's aware, he doesn't need her any more. He doesn't know she's an agent, he thinks she's 'a bird with a wing down' - and he's saved her from Greene, so she's out of the picture (so he thinks). Greene himself is now the target.
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 1,394
    Iv always found it weird that Bond hands over an unconscious Camille over to a complete random dude after the boat chase.For all Bond knew that guy could have been some weird sex offender!

    I know it’s supposed to be a funny moment,but dumping an unconscious beautiful woman into the hands of a complete stranger doesn’t sound wise.
  • Posts: 1,314
    I just find the character arcs and exposition in those early scenes very strange.

    I think bond has like 5 lines in the whole first twenty minutes.

    Also when bond knocks the guy off the roof in a bregenz and greene’s henchman kills him, M says bond shot and killed him and then restricts his movements. Bond doesn’t even correct her.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited November 2021 Posts: 3,154
    Well, he hands Camille over to someone in uniform, so it's not totally random. Correct M? What is it he says instead? 'I'm not dwelling on the past and I don't think you should either'? That gag's better than him denying and justifying, no?
  • Posts: 391
    It's probably just down to the writer's strike, and they shot scenes at different moments that didn't gel with each other, but didn't care.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    edited November 2021 Posts: 1,036
    As much as I’d love those early scenes to be fleshed out more, it highlights a larger quality of QOS in that it is made with incredibly efficient storytelling.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    I get the idea behind the editing and I really love the movie. But the editing will never fully grow on me and to me they just went „out there“ too far. A few more frames … and I could follow what‘s going on. I have watched it many times by now but still I am confused way too often about who‘s who and where. It‘s the film‘s only true flaw in my book, though.
  • Posts: 1,314
    Well we can agree to disagree though I appreciate your positive interpretation.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    Posts: 698
    Matt007 wrote: »
    The film looks like someone tied a go pro to an Alsatian.

    The whole thing is rushed. One minute we’re in London then after 20 seconds of dialogue we’re in the Caribbean or wherever fighting someone we know nothing about, who bond then poses as, gets into a car with a girl we know nothing about who promptly tries to kill him, who then goes to someone else we know nothing about who tries to kill her. She is then given to the second villain we know nothing about, and then bond rescues her for reasons unclear from a boat before handing her over unconscious. Jesus what a mess

    I like the fog of war aspect of QOS. Most Bond movies spell out the movements of the villains for the audience before even Bond knows what's going on. If QOS had been told traditionally we probably would have seen the corrupt cops take down Mathis and stuff him into Bond's trunk. Instead, we're with Bond when he discovers Mathis's body and have the same shock he does. We're experiencing the story as Bond would, as someone who's essentially on the run and dealing with things as they happen. It wouldn't work for every Bond movie, but IMO it works for QOS.
  • Posts: 1,926
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    The film looks like someone tied a go pro to an Alsatian.

    The whole thing is rushed. One minute we’re in London then after 20 seconds of dialogue we’re in the Caribbean or wherever fighting someone we know nothing about, who bond then poses as, gets into a car with a girl we know nothing about who promptly tries to kill him, who then goes to someone else we know nothing about who tries to kill her. She is then given to the second villain we know nothing about, and then bond rescues her for reasons unclear from a boat before handing her over unconscious. Jesus what a mess

    I like the fog of war aspect of QOS. Most Bond movies spell out the movements of the villains for the audience before even Bond knows what's going on. If QOS had been told traditionally we probably would have seen the corrupt cops take down Mathis and stuff him into Bond's trunk. Instead, we're with Bond when he discovers Mathis's body and have the same shock he does. We're experiencing the story as Bond would, as someone who's essentially on the run and dealing with things as they happen. It wouldn't work for every Bond movie, but IMO it works for QOS.

    I like this take. I also look at the frantic feel of the action scenes being reflective of what it would feel like to be caught up those types of situations where everything happens lightning-quick.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited November 2021 Posts: 3,154
    Yes, that's precisely what Forster said he was trying to do - put the viewer 'in the car' with Bond during the opening chase, etc. Same with the Mitchell chase/fight and the boat chase. I think Forster succeeded in doing exactly what he set out to do. It wasn't a chaotic mess - it was meant to look the way it did.
  • M16_CartM16_Cart Craig fanboy?
    edited November 2021 Posts: 541
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Also when bond knocks the guy off the roof in a bregenz and greene’s henchman kills him, M says bond shot and killed him and then restricts his movements. Bond doesn’t even correct her.

    That's like a classic romance movie trope. The thing that would resolve a story if it were explained for just a few seconds. But is left unexplained to fuel the plot.

Sign In or Register to comment.