Quantum of Solace - The worst Bond flick to date

2456715

Comments

  • Oh man Luds, there's so much wrong with that statement I don't even know where to start. But I think I'll just agree to disagree on both DAD and TWINE. If we want to talk about the worst bond flick I don't see how DAF could ever lose that crown! :)
  • LudsLuds MIA
    Posts: 1,986
    OK ok, I'll grand you DAF worst EON Connery ;)
  • Actually that's YOLT [-X :-c
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    QOS is not THE worst, it's the second worst, after AVTAK.
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Hmm. Nostalgia trip? What abt the references to GF, TSWLM, DAF and OHMSS. True, there may not have been as many as DAD but nonetheless, they were there.

    Secondly, in regard to the CGI gunbarrel in DAD, at least that film HAD a gunbarrel where it should be and didn't cram it in half-heartedly at the end ;)

    Thirdly, whilst I didn't intend to defend DAD I still think the sword-fight scene is better overall than the somewhat pretentious Tosca sequence. The "style" of Quantum is rather superficial and doesn't really contribute much to the overall narrative arc. We get some fancy title cards, a pretentious title randomly taken from an unrelated short story, editing that could have been done by someone on speed and an "arty" action sequence which feels a bit...out of place in a Bond film. Give me a "traditional" action scene (the Madagascar and Miami Airport sequences in CR, the tank chase in GE, the cargo net fight in TLD, the PTS of TSWLM and heck even the sword fight in DAD) anyday.

    Unfortunately, whilst the film had potential to offer quite a lot, it doesn't succeed in the way it should. By the end of the film we know little more about Quantum than we did at the start (other than that "they had people everywhere"). The film just has a "filler" feeling to it.

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,256
    QoS isn't the worst Bond film ever IMO. I rank it somewhere in the middle. It could have been a very good Bond film but they chose to pamper the ADHD generation and that's where the film loses me.
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 303
    Imo QoS is a good action and saturday night film, as i watched it (again) last night, but i agree that it doesn't quite fit as a bond film. Still it's one that i chose to just pass the time by, and i like the hand-held camera use in action films, the lighting and settings made the film feel modern, which i don't get from alot of things (which i actually liked about the film, strangely), and i think that hard-cuts work here, but unfortunately take it away from been a bond film.
  • i think its a very good bond film.

    you cant follow it...SERIOUSLY!!!
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited March 2011 Posts: 15,723
    QOS is 22nd in my ranking, so yes I agree. A good action flick*, but a horrible Bond movie.

    * But still non-existant next to Taken.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I think that the problem is not one of being unable to follow it, but simply NOT caring much about what happens. The main story holding the film together is pretty thin and as a result we don't really feel INVOLVED in the film.
  • I watched this last night , and I have to agree with the sentiment at the top of this thread
    , there was no humour, characters were appearing then getting killed off lift right and centre so there was no character development. The editing was very jumpy the opera scene was almost illegible.
    Die another day while not may favourite Bond film is better because it sustains a comic book escapist fantasy where you not expected to take it to seriously,
    It did have somecommendable attributes as well the photography was good Dame Judy Ditch was good, but the negatives out Weigh his.
    The contrast with Casino Royal couldn’t be greater which is almost a pitch perfect bond move.
  • Sorry but this is all daft
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    Not in the slightest. It's very middle of the road, had some great ideas it in, many of which should be taken forward as some "new ground" has been discovered. The editing is one of the main issues - why on Earth did EON hire Dan Bradley? X(
  • Posts: 638
    I think there was a good movie in QoS trying to get out. Unfortunately much of it was ruined in the editing room and Forester's idea of having the movie "move like a speeding bullet". Had they slowed down the editing on the action scenes and given another 15-20 minutes to flesh out the story and characters, it could have been a great film.
  • Posts: 638
    I think there was a good movie in QoS trying to get out. Unfortunately much of it was ruined in the editing room and Forester's idea of having the movie "move like a speeding bullet". Had they slowed down the editing on the action scenes and given another 15-20 minutes to flesh out the story and characters, it could have been a great film.
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 503
    Quoting jaguar007: Had they slowed down the editing on the action scenes and given another 15-20 minutes to flesh out the story and characters, it could have been a great film.
    Agreed. But unlike some here, I feel that the editing and storyline development problems alone make it one of the worst Bond films. DAD sucks, but at least you can follow it, identify it as a Bond film, and it doesn't give you seizures. I still rank DAD lower than QOS, but it's a close call.
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 1,092
    You haters need to get the Blur-ray of QoS and jam up the sound. Sit back, watch and have your brain melted. It's one of the best BDs on the market today, even better than CR and that one is amazing. What's wrong with having a slam bam, kick you in the gut Bond film every now and then? It's good for the long term success of our franchise. Variety is the spice of life after all.
  • Posts: 2,491
    Quoting Luds: I think that the action in QOS is quite spectacular,
    yea that is what saves the movie and why it isnt so low on my list.if they didnt have that action it would be definitely worst Bond movie.
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Quoting Bond: DAD sucks, but at least you can follow it, identify it as a Bond film, and it
    doesn't give you seizures.
    Agreed
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 107
    Quoting Bond: but at least you can follow it, identify it as a Bond film, and it doesn't give you seizures.
    I must've watched a different film then, because Quantum of Solace enabled me to do all three of those things.

    Same goes to those who classify Quantum of Solace as "humorless." I know I laughed. Was it too dry or something? I always thought a wit that dry would fit Bond like a glove.

    And frankly, more Bond films could do with Forster's "speeding bullet" mentality. The editing is flawed (particularly during the boat chase), but Quantum of Solace is still the most well-paced Bond film since GoldenEye. It was a veritable breath of fresh air to come out of the theater without having experience a dragged-out, bloated, and in some cases unnecessary third act, having done so for every Bond other film from 1997 forward.

    The direction's also got more personality in one over-edited action sequence (all inherent drawbacks accounted for) than the likes of The World Is Not Enough or, hell, any John Glen-directed Bond film manage in their entire running times. EDIT: Or Tomorrow Never Dies, or the majority of Die Another Day, or even either of Martin Campbell's Bond films.

    The "middling" assessment of Quantum of Solace seems far more reasonable to me than any other.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I thought it was a rather erratic film in terms of pacing to be honest. It jumps about between locations, has TWO extended action sequences within the first 10 minutes and its not until the second half that the film slows down and allows the audience to breathe.

    Another thing I dislike about the film is the baddie's main scheme. Whatever happened to thinking big (the mad Nazi scientist who wanted to destroy London)?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited March 2011 Posts: 15,723
    Quoting JobeGDG: well-paced Bond film since GoldenEye.
    That statement is a total mystery to me. A film where Bond doesn't get his official mission started before the 40 minutes mark is well-paced? GE is a catastrophe, pace-wise. Bond's mission stalls for the nearly half the film. GE has got to be the slowest Bond film of all. Nothing happens for 40 minutes.
  • Posts: 1,856
    No Casino Royal (the 60's one) is the worst
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 11,189
    I'm probably being a bit harsh on Quantum to be fair. Craig and Dench do pretty decent jobs but there is just something really... bland about the film as a whole. I can't quite put my finger on it :(

    At the moment I'd give it a 4 or 5 out of 10 but it certainly competes with DAD, TMWTGG and DAF for the position of "worst Bond film". Each of the former films had something that stood out however - more so than Quantum.

    I think its just the fact that the film recycles a lot of things we've seen in other (better) films. Rooftop chases (Vertigo, The Matrix), car chases (The Rock, Bullet), boat chases (Face Off), plane chases (YOLT and even TND).

    Couple that with the thin story.
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 267
    QoS was a solid Bond film IMO. I can enjoy watching it, but at the same time I spend parts of my time watching it thinking about what it could've been. It was similar to LTK in that I think its biggest detriment was that it tried to be too edgy at times and distance itself from the other films.

    With a longer script, more dialog and more plot exposition I think it really could've been a great film. The script simply needed more development time. Taking out the plane chase and just adding in more dialog would've done wonders. I also believe that they should've started the film off with Bond interrogating White at his place, and then having some kind of minor action sequence that lead into the car chase.
  • edited March 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Quoting bondboy007: I also believe that they should've started the film off with Bond interrogating
    White at his place, and then having some kind of minor action sequence that lead
    into the car chase.
    IMO they should have cut the car chase altogether and started the film with the interrogation scene. This would have helped established the rather tense, dark mood and led into the chase sequence (which had potential but needed to be slowed down - A LOT).

    Have the shot of Bond firing into the camera and killing Mitchell before the opening credits.

    Also, I would have changed the theme tune to this:


    It would have built up more momentum for the upcoming film.
  • Posts: 638
    Quoting BAIN123: Rooftop chases (Vertigo, The Matrix)
    Not to mention TLD!
  • it's not the worst because it isn't a Bond film. Apart from some chap calling himself Bond and a few drinks that were shaken. It's just a series of chases; car chase, rooftop chase, boat chase, plane chase...As JUST an action movie it was ok.

    And Jaguar007 good point about TLD - one of the last great true Bond movies - was aped by Bourne in his last outing with the rooftop chase such a rip off.

    One more thing about QofS can someone please tell me about the car chase; how did the second Alfa Romeo get through when the first one blocked the road with the truck? Did I miss something? Surely it was impossible for it to get through? Can someone please enlighten me please?

    Thanks




  • edited March 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Quoting jaguar007: Not to mention TLD!
    Indeed.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited March 2011 Posts: 4,399
    Quoting BAIN123:
    Quoting Bond: DAD sucks, but at least you can follow it, identify it as a Bond film, and it

    doesn't give you seizures.



    Agreed
    I have never understood that argument -> 'not being able to follow it'... do you mean, not being able to follow every minuscule detail of an action sequence? or the story in general... because I found both easy to follow.... yes, the editing during the action sequences did leave a lot to be desired - but do you need to be privy to every little detail going on in order to follow it?... The story was fairly simple to follow too, unless that is, you have small bladder or ADD... it's a film that forced you to pay attention, and wasn't going to play dumb and spoon feed you every little plot point (ie: Die Another Day, The World Is Not Enough, Tomorrow Never Dies)... i liked that - i liked a movie treating me like an adult that can add 2 and 2 together on my own... If this film's pace left you in the dust, then I'm sorry - it's all of your losses, not ours..

    And there was humor in the film - actually more than CR if you can believe that... but i guess a lot of people still need to have a joke setup on tee in order for them to get it, or find it funny.... one thing i couldn't stand about Brosnan - you knew a joke was coming a mile away - same as Moore........... could not stand that...
Sign In or Register to comment.