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
I love QoS. Hated it at the cinema when I couldn't follow the plot or the action scenes, but after several viewings I can now follow both. The editing and cinematography is wonderful. I consider QoS a true modern successor to the Terrence Young style. Better than any of the Brosnan movies.
I think it's better than many on here make out.
If you'd made those films without the gadgets, the Bond theme and all the cliches established from GF onwards you'd have 3 generic 90's action movies with some transatlantic drawling smug playboy using a machine allot and one god awful C.G.I soaked pile of noughties bollocks, DAD is damned as soon as that gun barrel.
If QOS had been soaked in the Bond cliches and had the JB theme all over it would be a different case, for me I'll take Craig playing Bond in a flawed entry but one that doesn't smash me over the head with elements to convince me I'm watching a Bond film, pretty much what every Brosnan film was from TND onwards.
Brosnan films couldn't stand up on their own they needed everything but the kitchen sink to convince you it was a Bond film you were watching, remove them and it would be a different story, Craig convinces on performance alone, Brosnan would never be able to do that, anyway Skyfall will shut all this nonsense up about Craig not being Bond enough, CR made Brosnan era look ridiculous,SF is going to make it look obsolete.
Well said.
I think the sort of the same about QOS. Take out M, etc, and rename the Bond character and for most of it you're left with a generic noughties action film.
Stop talking about your opinion like it's a fact. EG
"CR made Brosnan era look ridiculous"
No, you think it did.
"CR made Brosnan era look ridiculous,SF is going to make it look obsolete."
For me at least, this most certainly seems to be the case.
With the Craig movies, Eon know they have an audience, and they also have a very capable actor, so they have room to experiment, top go deeper into character.
Once the current style of 'realism' has gone and the next trend in movie making has arrived, people will look at the Craig films differently. The Bond series has constantly varied between more fantastical (Dr No, YOLT, LaLD, TSWLM, MR, DAD) and more down-to-earth (FRWL, OHMSS, FYEO, TLD, LTK, CR, QoS).
Interesting...how did you find time to talk to every kid in the world?
Seriously, I've heard several boys from ages 12 to...well, being full grown men enthusiastically talking about how cool Craig's Bond is. This ranges from young relatives to kids in a mall or movie theatre or even on the subway! So Bond is still relevant, and across many ages and types of boys.
If you don't think that Bond is cool and suave in recent films then I think we must have watched different movies...
this is my favorite scene in any bond film!
Today I am a teacher and none of the kids want to be like him. Of course I have no idea if kids in Guetemala, Guam or Greenland feel the same way. [/quote]
Actually I don't think he is as cool and sophisticated as lets say Connery's Bond. And he is not meant to, either. Remember the recent films are reboots.
Moore and Brosnan actively included kids in their audience, yes...but was Bond really meant for kids?
One thing I really liked about the EON documentary was Daltons statement about his darker style, something along the lines: "People were confused, they could not take their kids anymore to watch Bond. But it was never meant to be for kids!"
Still, I was introduced to the series via Brosnan, and just like I think QoS is underrated, I think people are overly harsh to Brosnan. I prefer Connery, Dalton and Craig, but Moore and Brosnan made some highly entertaining movies and did, for their respective time, a good job and not only kept the series alive, but kept making it more and more successful.
Without Brosnan we might not have gotten Craig or any other Bond film! Just as well, no Dalton if there wasn't Moore carrying Bond through the 70s and partly through the 80s.
There are many different styles and takes on the character, but that has not to be a bad thing.
I just watched Dr. No, FRWML and Goldfinger. It is shocking how different Goldfinger feels to FRWL and while I prefer FRWL, I was hugely entertained by GF and love it almost just as much.
My guess is, that most would answer before the age of 20 (I recall a thread somewhere).
Why do you think that is? And what would happen if the Bond series go all "mature audiences only"?
When I was a kid I saw TLD at the cinema, and I wanted to be Dalton. Some of my mates thought he was the best Bond too. I think kids can go to every Bond film except maybe LTK.
And that's a good thing. If Bond was for adults only we'd lose tons of future fans and the series might not be as successful.
Thank you! I love Dalton but if every Bond was like Dalton or Craig it'd get boring. I think every Bond has done well.
That's just cruel. At any age.
Not for me, It was a wonderful life changing introduction to James Bond. Golden has been ans always be my most favorite James Bond film. :D
Respect!
\m/
Yep. Music still sounds as awful as ever. It takes real talent to make the Bond theme sound that naff.
TND is great fun. Loads of good action, Wai Lin, Brosnan quite menacing (and noticably a bit more muscular than in his other movies), the martini shots scene, the remote control car chase, the bike chase, Teri Hatcher....
Okay, compare the actions sequences in those two pictures. It's not even close.
You're serious?
I think the halo jump in TND beats any action scene in QOS. There's also the PTS, the car chase, etc.
All the action in QOS was ruined by the shaky cam/editing.
Both films have a bit too much action imo, but at least in TND you can follow the action.
TND has a horrible PTS.
Yes thelivingroyale it is my opinion not fact, not that you aren't guilty of hammering home your opinion, people in glass houses eh?
And why did they include two action scenes in under 10 minutes? Personally I think they should have gone with the second action scene in the PTS (i.e. the interrogation and chase with Slate) and end it with Bond firing at the camera, killing the trecherous agent - that would have been a good way to lead into the opening credits (they would have needed to slow down the camerawork in that scene too but hey ho).
The one in TND is flawed but I've always found the moment just before the jet leaves the runway exillerating, Brosnan's face, David Arnold's music, the editing when the plane actually takes off - all nicely done.
Its a bit too reliant on action but would I take it over the PTS in QoS? Yes I think I would (and I say that as someone who now ranks TND in the lower half).