Quantum of Solace - The worst Bond flick to date

1910111315

Comments

  • It's by far the weakest film of the Craig era but I still enjoy it as I do all Bond movies.
  • okay, though I can see why people would put QoS near the bottom (i personally like it a lot), I think it's absurd that someone could watch it next to Moonraker/TMWTGG or even DAF and tell me QoS is the lesser film
  • Posts: 6,396
    okay, though I can see why people would put QoS near the bottom (i personally like it a lot), I think it's absurd that someone could watch it next to Moonraker/TMWTGG or even DAF and tell me QoS is the lesser film

    The technical aspects of MR - the direction, cinematography, set design, special effects, music are superior to QOS in every way. Even the action, which may indeed be utterly ludicrous at times, is handled in a more coherent manner.
  • Whenever I watch QOS, the one thing that I think is really missing is a ray-gun fight in space. In that regard, Moonraker has QOS beat.
  • Posts: 15,229
    chrisisall wrote:
    It doesn't feature in many peoples bottom three for no reason.
    OHMSS & LTK used to as well, long ago...
    ;)

    Exactly. An appeal to popularity (or unpopularity) means nothing. QOS is a mess of a movie, I have no issue to say it, but it is not devoid of qualities.
  • edited March 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Interesting to read an old review of QoS from the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/filmreviews/3562728/James-Bond-007-Quantum-of-Solace-review.html

    I think it's a fair review. The following summarises my feelings on QoS quite effectively.

    This film catches Ian Fleming's hero on the run, keeps him running, and zips along with a jolting, almost offensive velocity, catching its ragged breath in the rare opportunity for dialogue. Fans of the series who like to slow down and savour the scenery, enjoying a drip-feed of dodgy innuendo, may consider this a rude awakening - it's the shortest Bond movie to date, and easily the most terse.


    But consider how many of the pictures, to include Casino Royale, run out of steam as they drag themselves across the two hour mark, if not long before. Quantum of Solace may hurtle through its own (sketchy) plot as if it's not quite the point - there have been more satisfying narrative pay-offs than we get here - but its best sequences bring you up short in the best way, adding up to the giddiest straight ride since The Living Daylights.


    I also found this the most enjoyable entry in the series since TLD - the first time since 1987 that I actually just sat back and soaked it up. Tha't not to say it doesn't have faults - far from it. But I personally found it quite refreshing.
  • edited March 2014 Posts: 11,189
    IMO while Solace does have a few good scenes there's no debate which is the superior film between that and CR. I know which film I've enjoyed more when re-watching the two.

    This is an Indie wannabe Bond film
  • SuperheroSithSuperheroSith SE London
    Posts: 578
    Among the worst, but not THE worst for me.
  • edited March 2014 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    IMO while Solace does have a few good scenes there's no debate which is the superior film between that and CR. I know which film I've enjoyed more when re-watching the two.

    This is an Indie wannabe Bond film

    I fully appreciate the quality of CR, but when I first saw it, I just found it over-long. I see it as less than the sum of its parts - great scenes, characters and some decent dialogue, but overall not quite as satisfying as I thought it was going to be. It didn't carry me along in the same as the early classic Bonds.

    I'm not for a moment claiming QoS is a classic, but I did enjoy it on a purely visceral level - just sitting back and enjoying the ride - in a way that I hadn't done since TLD. I do find some scenes confusing and I would have enjoyed a little slowing of the pace and slightly fewer pointless action scenes, but overall, on first viewing at least, I found it pretty decent.

    While the reviews at the time weren't glowing, it's noticeable that very few of them slated it in the way that some fans do on here. I feel that just as SF is overhyped, QoS has been unfairly maligned. I probably wouldn't rank them that far apart to be honest, but my personal preference would place QoS above SF.
  • edited March 2014 Posts: 11,189
    QoS isn't all that bad, but I think the same as you do with CR (i.e. "a sum of its parts").

    By the time it ends though I always think...meh.

    I do remember leaving the cinema in 2008 thinking that something just wasn't right with the film. To me, while SF has its weaknesses, I simply find it a more entertaining, better produced experience.
  • edited March 2014 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    QoS isn't all that bad, but I think the same as you do with CR (i.e. "a sum of its parts").

    By the time it ends though I always think...meh.

    I do remember leaving the cinema in 2008 thinking that something just wasn't right with the film. To me, while SF has its weaknesses, I simply find it a more entertaining, better produced experience.

    Glad I wasn't the only one to feel that way about CR. I still think it's better than SF though.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I meant that QoS is more the sum of its parts. For me CR is #3 in my rankings. QoS is #19
  • Posts: 19,339
    I think the title for the worst Bond film goes to...................................DAF.
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I meant that QoS is more the sum of its parts. For me CR is #3 in my rankings. QoS is #19

    'More than the sum of it's parts' is a compliment - i.e. the film adds up to more than its constituent ingredients would suggest. 'Less than the some of' suggests the film is not as good overall as the individual elements.

    Or at least, that's how I've always understood it.

  • edited March 2014 Posts: 11,189
    In chronological order DAF, TMWTGG and DAD are the three worst films for me.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,829
    Getafix wrote:
    While the reviews at the time weren't glowing, it's noticeable that very few of them slated it in the way that some fans do on here. I feel that just as SF is overhyped, QoS has been unfairly maligned. I probably wouldn't rank them that far apart to be honest, but my personal preference would place QoS above SF.

    100% agreement here, rare, but a fact.
  • Posts: 2,341
    IMO the three worst movies are MR, DAF, DAD

    QoS is the obvious weaker of the Craig films but it is not the worst of the series.
  • Posts: 11,189
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    IMO the three worst movies are MR, DAF, DAD

    QoS is the obvious weaker of the Craig films but it is not the worst of the series.

    Substitute MR for MWTGG and I'm in agreement with you on the three worst films.

    For me QOS is #19 at the moment. Elements of it are good but as a whole it's just doesn't feel wholly satisfying for me. AVTAK, MWTGG, DAD and DAF are the only ones I consider to be worse and the ones I would want to rewatch the least.
  • Posts: 12,521
    I'm really annoyed whenever I see people put QoS at #23, or even in the bottom three honestly. I respect everyone's opinions to an extent, but I just don't understand how anyone could think QoS is worse than DAF, MR, AVTAK, or DAD. QoS is widely viewed as Craig's weakest Bond film (which I agree with), but I've always thought people take it too far by putting in in the bottom 5 a lot of the time. IMO, it's middling at worst. I enjoy it a lot and appreciate it as one of the most underrated Bond films.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited March 2014 Posts: 17,829
    Well, I'm really annoyed when people slate Brosnan, or DAF, or say DAD has no fun to it, or say QOS isn't more repeat-watchable than SF, or the Tarzan yell ruins OP, or that LTK is too much like Miami Vice, or when someone says Star Trek IV is too dopey to enjoy, or that Arnold's Freeze isn't hilarious in Batman & Robin, or that the narration in the theatrical version of Blade Runner sucks, or that they have never seen Serenity & have no interest in ever doing so....

    But, whatcha gonna do? :))
  • Posts: 12,521
    chrisisall wrote:
    Well, I'm really annoyed when people slate Brosnan, or DAF, or say DAD has no fun to it, or say QOS isn't more repeat-watchable than SF, or the Tarzan yell ruins OP, or that LTK is too much like Miami Vice, or when someone says Star Trek IV is too dopey to enjoy, or that Arnold's Freeze isn't hilarious in Batman & Robin, or that the narration in the theatrical version of Blade Runner sucks, or that they have never seen Serenity & have no interest in ever doing so....

    But, whatcha gonna do? :))

    Yeah even though I consider it the weakest of Connery's films, DAF still had some great fun to it (Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd steal the show :P). And yes the Tarzan yell is ridiculous, but it doesn't completely ruin OP for me either (I admit it's not one of my favorite Bond films, but I don't consider it bad either). Oh well...

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited March 2014 Posts: 17,829
    FoxRox wrote:
    Yeah even though I consider it the weakest of Connery's films, DAF still had some great fun to it (Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd steal the show :P). And yes the Tarzan yell is ridiculous, but it doesn't completely ruin OP for me either (I admit it's not one of my favorite Bond films, but I don't consider it bad either). Oh well...
    How can you POSSIBLY watch Sean Connery talking to a rat & not find that hysterical?

    Oh. Just now I get the reference to Indy's Dad not liking rats in Last Crusade. I feel like an idiot; I don't know vat to say...
  • Posts: 12,521
    chrisisall wrote:
    FoxRox wrote:
    Yeah even though I consider it the weakest of Connery's films, DAF still had some great fun to it (Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd steal the show :P). And yes the Tarzan yell is ridiculous, but it doesn't completely ruin OP for me either (I admit it's not one of my favorite Bond films, but I don't consider it bad either). Oh well...
    How can you POSSIBLY watch Sean Connery talking to a rat & not find that hysterical?

    Oh. Just now I get the reference to Indy's Dad not liking rats in Last Crusade. I feel like an idiot; I don't know vat to say...

    I realized that before; there's also the rats in FRWL. Speaking of which I love Last Crusade; one of my favorite adventure films, and my favorite Indy film. But yeah DAF, while not exactly a well-made film, can be a lot of fun sometimes (particularly the first half and final scene).

  • Posts: 19,339
    There is no way that QOS is the worst film of the series,not even close.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    barryt007 wrote:
    There is no way that QOS is the worst film of the series,not even close.

    Not as good as the films that bookend it, but certainly in the upper half. Maybe top ten even.
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote:
    There is no way that QOS is the worst film of the series,not even close.

    Not as good as the films that bookend it, but certainly in the upper half. Maybe top ten even.

    I've got it at #15 at the moment,but it could well climb on the next viewing,as SF could at #8....they are hard to pin down.

  • Posts: 7,653
    barryt007 wrote:
    There is no way that QOB is the worst film of the series,not even close.

    On my list it most certainly is. ;)

    And I am sure I am not the only one.
  • Posts: 11,425
    QoS is currently one of the most underrated Bond films around here. A mid table entry at worst.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    QoS is my biggest disappointment in the series, but it is far from being a bad film. Like every Bond it has it's share of canonically worthy highlights.
  • edited March 2014 Posts: 12,837
    Getafix wrote:
    QoS is currently one of the most underrated Bond films around here.

    Is it? There are one or two members that are a bit harsh on it but I think all the fans who claim it's an underrated masterpiece balance things out. QOS gets more than enough praise.
Sign In or Register to comment.