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
They have almost 20 other movies from 1962 to 2002 to go like, minus OHMSS.
I emailed him “ I don’t think the dead care about vengeance”
Why minus OHMSS?
Because it was the only film in that series that dared to be different. Sean Connery even said he wished he had done a film like that one.
Let us know what the professor's response is if you get one about that! @JamesBondKenya
Bond and Camille traveled from the desert, representing their inner turmoil of dryness. Then Bond travels to the snowy icy part of Kazan, Russia to confront Yusef.
Despite the coldness of the world, Bond comes to terms and has M on his side. If it wasn't for this film or this scene, SF wouldn't have been able to piggy back off of their relationship. The snowfall represented everything surrounding them despite having one another for support. Bond never left.
He called me out the next day in front of the whole class and was like “ugh didn’t you have an interesting quote , what was it again.., something about the dead”. And I repeated the quote to which he said,” is that your own quote” and then I took credit for it like the sinful human I am.
Quantum of Solace is the undiscovered gem that keeps on paying dividends to this day.
Let's be frank, QoS exudes an atomosphere of melancholy in many aspects of the film. The dramatic scenes have not been matched yet and it was continuing to story of CR so it is an essential film but too much action caused a misunderstanding.
It’s average at best. SF is far superior.
There’s no comparison. Deakins is as good as it gets. The way he lights the finale is art.
I agree. There is great cinematography in the sixties Bonds, and all of Craig s films, but SF is in a league of its own. I believe it contributed greatly to its success.
I'm probably a Deakins fan second to none. But Roberto Schaefer is doing an excellent job in cinematography as well, if you look at his individual shots. It's just that Cheese and Pearson cut it apart so rabidly that one can't enjoy it ("one" means "I", I'm aware, but I have the feeling I'm not nearly alone). For me, the editing is what's sounding the death knell over anything one might like about the visual aspects of QOS. It's just a mess. They should re-edit and re-issue the entire film, and it might be a top-5 entry.
Eye of the beholder and all that.
I’d definitely agree with that.
Schaefer is certainly decent. The issue with QoS, for me, is that it’s listless and doesn’t have the gusto of SF. There’s a very definite vision for SF that is driven heavily by the cinematography. QoS, by comparison, is muddled, so where the cinematography is ‘good’ (I.e. shot composition) it’s essentially just a perfume ad. The narrative is flimsy so there’s no weight to anything.
Just to avoid any confusion, I think that SF is infinitely better than QOS, though I don't think the latter is "bad". SF is my No. 2 Bond film right beind FRWL, not least of Deakins' cinematography, and regardless of what I think of any others. I do think, though, that the positive aspects of QOS deserve mentioning. It could have been so much better with a different kind of editing, kind of like OHMSS without Lazenby.
I absolutely think QoS has positives, I just don’t ascribe to the idea it’s a misunderstood masterpiece. It simply isn’t. It’s not even comparable to OHMSS for me, which is a virtuoso bit of work from Hunt.
Right, because the special effects of the Moore era were amazing. Kananga's death for me is #1 special effect of all time. And let's not forget the totally believable stuntman on A View to a Kill. Totally does not break the immersion when a 50 year old has a 30 year old stunt double very obviously in the film!
I have to say, I don't think it's a masterpiece, but I think it's underrated as a Bond film. There's also a lot of nostalgia for me for the film. When I listen to the soundtrack of QoS and I'm teleported back to the time I watched it, I feel more than just a soundtrack. I think everyone sort of has this connection with a Bond film.
Same here. I feel that way about all the Brosnan films and CR/QOS.
I am nor sure though why that is. Because SP was a letdown (for many)? Or from a more distant view it shows that great amount of energy that in many ways was absent from SF and SP? Personally, I lean to the latter.
I like Skyfall - no doubt. But CR and QoS are the „energy booster“ entries from Craig where SF is to me the melancholic one.
Couldn't have said it better @SeanCraig
I don’t see or feel the energy. I find it sluggish. It opens well and then completely loses its way. CR and SF by comparison are paced excellently by comparison. It’s frenetically shot and cut, but that doesn’t translate because the narrative is turgid.