Quantum of Solace Appreciation Thread- We Found a Better Place to Meet

1161719212270

Comments

  • Posts: 19,339
    I think,in time,QoS will recieve a 'cult' following,it's more of an 'arty' Bond film..
  • Posts: 11,425
    Time will tell. I definitely think it's better than most people on here make out. I doubt it will come to be seen as another OHMSS, but I do think when future generations of fans come to watch it, they'll see it as the rather neat little entertaining movie that it is.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I think,in time,QoS will recieve a 'cult' following,it's more of an 'arty' Bond film..

    Once there are several more films and a new Bond I very much doubt it. It's an absolutely valid entry in the canon, but it has no more about it than any other standard entry to warrant 'cult' status. In most cases it's lacking. I imagine it will only remain a favourite for those who genuinely love it and for the rest, passable to poor. I don't imagine it'll be reappraised in OHMSS fashion. That's masterful film making that was ahead of the curve. QoS isn't.
  • Posts: 479
    If it does garner a cult following, I fear I will become part of the minority. But, as RC7 says, I doubt that highly. My biggest appreciation of QOS is that it meant that no more Bond films would be directed by Marc Forster. In that way, it did some good.
  • Posts: 15,106
    chrisisall wrote: »
    dalton wrote: »
    Glad to see that there's a thread like this here. I love Quantum of Solace. It is, IMO, the best of the Craig films. Yes, there are some areas where they could have perhaps expanded on the story a bit and developed things better, aside from that, I can't think of much that's wrong with it (aside from the terrible title track, of course).
    We see eye to eye here.
    I love QOS in part BECAUSE it seems raw, fast paced & slightly unfinished. It reminds me of Dr. No in many ways.

    In the old forums I once started a thread drawing comparisons between the two. It has many elements similar to DN: the setting, Greene and No's ideological stance, etc.
  • Posts: 27
    QOS is a great Bond-Film. I saw it with a friend of mine and we both really liked it. Quantum meeting in Bregenz reminded me on annual World Economic Forum meeting in Davos (the place in CH where Marc Forster went to school) where the world's richest industrialists and world's most influential politicians meet for 1 week, make their own businesses each year and often don't care about human casualties, they only like to make more profit. Meeting is protected by Swiss army (!) and the police, no protest action can come to them, it's closed area. And yes, they like to present themselves like Mr. Greene did it on his Green Planet party in QOS. And, yes, also Nestle is among them in Davos and that's a monster-company with a bad reputation, interested in water reserves as well. Each year all world newspapers are informing about this forum for 1 week in late January.
    Knowing all that, I loved the QOS-plot immensely. And as a lifelong Bond-Fan I liked everything else as well. Paying hommage to OHMSS at the beginning. Great song by White. Punchy feeling, no time to loose. Great action sequences one after another. So many memorable details - engine start in PTS, bus - jump, a fall trough glass roof, and that gunshot on post-title sequence (breathless!), the death of Slate, lively diverse musical score (best Arnold's score with nice themes), motorbike override, injury on beautiful Camille's back, villain which needs no showing off because he is too powerful already (very european style) played very well by Amalric, disgusting Medrano, the poor every day life of south America, young unexperienced character of sexy Strawberry Fields, whole Tosca sequence, Mathis' thoughts of relativity, tensed dogfight, giant water reserve, no water for locals, guitar theme on the road, best Bond - Photography ever (thank you Roberto Shäfer) , Interior-hommage to Ken Adam in the Hotel de las dunas, fast gutty finale and finally most sinister (Yusuf-) CODA of a Bond Films ever (Guy Hamilton-Bonds all had Codas) with a famous "Sit Down" finishing CR, necklace in the snow. I saw this movie about 20 times and will probably watch it more. It's much easier to watch QOS again for all reasons I watch Bond movies again and again - which I unfortunately can't do with Skyfall. Already watching SF in cinema, I missed the art of QOS action sequences. SF has other qualities which are original to Bond world (listen to a Mendes-Commentary on a BR/DVD, it's great!), but if I want a straight modern Bond Movie QOS is the one for sure following Dr.No, FRWL, OHMSS, FYEO, LTK and TND. I would very much like for Forster to make another one, but this time with a finished script (!) and 6 months instead of 8 weeks to edit.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    seroxx wrote: »
    I would very much like for Forster to make another one, but this time with a finished script (!) and 6 months instead of 8 weeks to edit.
    I concur. Having seen it again a few days ago my appreciation for this tight little work of art has only increased.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    QoS is the only Bond film I have and will only have on my Samsung to watch anywhere as it's a great film, lean and tight but also introduces thread and ideas that if expanded upon and better realised it could have been one of the very unequivocal best in the series.
  • Posts: 11,425
    It's wonderful to see the appreciation for QoS only growing. It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series. So many great touches and such a refreshing pace - it's like a breath of fresh air. Far from faultless and doubtless could have benefited from more time on the script and in the editing suite, but given all the obstacles thrown in Forster's way, I think he did a very decent job.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Imagine if Forster got to direct SF'S and Mendes directed QoS with both scripts as they were,...
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Getafix wrote: »
    It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series.

    I don't think it is. It's lauded around these parts by a great many people. There are far better films that are nowhere near as fawned over as QoS.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Getafix wrote: »
    It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series.

    That title belongs to A View to a Kill.

  • doubleoego wrote: »
    QoS is the only Bond film I have and will only have on my Samsung to watch anywhere as it's a great film, lean and tight but also introduces thread and ideas that if expanded upon and better realised it could have been one of the very unequivocal best in the series.

    If there is one in the whole franchise,that would profit from a directors (final,producers,masters,whatever)cut it is this one.
    There is no other bond movie in which so little would have meant so much!
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series.

    I don't think it is. It's lauded around these parts by a great many people. There are far better films that are nowhere near as fawned over as QoS.

    Didn't we have this before? You see there is a reason why I don't contribute to the Skyfall appreciation thread. ;)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series.

    I don't think it is. It's lauded around these parts by a great many people. There are far better films that are nowhere near as fawned over as QoS.

    Didn't we have this before? You see there is a reason why I don't contribute to the Skyfall appreciation thread. ;)

    I'm not knocking QoS, I like it. I merely think it's fawned over to excess by some. Films like LALD and TSWLM are far superior, but no one feels the need to be overtly mawkish about them. Perhaps it's because they stand on their own and aren't in need of apologists to reinforce their impact.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    Everytime I rewatch QOS it gets better. The movie is just 105 minutes of flat-out, wall to wall action with some very good quiet scenes that puts it apart from other 'mindless' action movies. QOS has got a soul, IMO. Plus Craig is awesome in the film, and David Arnold gives his best Bond soundtrack.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117

    RC7 wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series.

    I don't think it is. It's lauded around these parts by a great many people. There are far better films that are nowhere near as fawned over as QoS.

    Didn't we have this before? You see there is a reason why I don't contribute to the Skyfall appreciation thread. ;)

    I'm not knocking QoS, I like it. I merely think it's fawned over to excess by some. Films like LALD and TSWLM are far superior, but no one feels the need to be overtly mawkish about them. Perhaps it's because they stand on their own and aren't in need of apologists to reinforce their impact.

    A fair point RC7. I dont see the same level of apologists ready to stand up for other flawed entries in the series such as YOLT and MR.

    Seems to me there is a snobbishness here that because of QOS's pretensions to be serious and arty people think it should escape the criticism of other lackustre Bond films.

    Sorry to say it but YOLT and MR hold together better and are more competently made films than QOS.

    The great shame is that QOS couldve been great but due largely to the script difficulties (although a lot of blame should also reside with Forster for his 'bullet from a gun' pacing crap, the editing and minor gripes like insisting MK Dons do the title sequence) it is alas a missed opportunity. This is where I think the sadness should lie - I dont really see how people can defend it to the point of calling it a great entry. Its plainly not, but it could have been - thats the tragedy.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series.

    I don't think it is. It's lauded around these parts by a great many people. There are far better films that are nowhere near as fawned over as QoS.

    Didn't we have this before? You see there is a reason why I don't contribute to the Skyfall appreciation thread. ;)

    I'm not knocking QoS, I like it. I merely think it's fawned over to excess by some. Films like LALD and TSWLM are far superior, but no one feels the need to be overtly mawkish about them. Perhaps it's because they stand on their own and aren't in need of apologists to reinforce their impact.

    A fair point RC7. I dont see the same level of apologists ready to stand up for other flawed entries in the series such as YOLT and MR.

    That's because there is no possible defending for YOLT(apart from some lovely colourful looks). It's the movie that gave James Bond such a nonsense reputation with so many intelligent people and - worst of all- made Mike Myers possible. That's all to be said about it,period!
    About MR, well lotsa people are very liberal in their praise for its splendid cinematography, epic soundtrack and one of the most exiting PTS in the franchise, so I don't quite see your point.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    there is no possible defending for YOLT(apart from some lovely colourful looks).
    Ennhhh! Sorry Hans, wrong guess. Would you like to go for Double Jeopardy where the scores can really change?
    :))
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    there is no possible defending for YOLT(apart from some lovely colourful looks).
    Would you like to go for Double Jeopardy where the scores can really change?
    :))

    I have to admit I don't quite get that one. Would you care to explain?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    I have to admit I don't quite get that one. Would you care to explain?
    Oh MAN! You never saw DIE HARD???

    No matter. I was just saying that I believe you are in error because I and many other Bond fans see much that is worthwhile & entertaining in YOLT despite some of the OTT moments.
    :)>-
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    edited September 2014 Posts: 5,080
    Regarding You Only Live Twice-
    Pros:
    -A great Barry score
    -THAT volcano set
    -The action inside the volcano
    -Charles Gray
    -That magnificent shot of the rooftop fight
    -The Osato HQ fight
    -The death of Aki
    -Q and Little Nellie
    -The PTS (I like it very much)
    -Brandt meets the piranhas

    Cons:
    -Connery
    -Rear projection (yes, I know it's present in almost all Bond films in the Connery/Moore eras, but I find YOLT to be a prolific offender)
    -Lapses in logic at times ("A drop in the ocean")
    -Anything to do with Connery looking like an absolute buffoon trying to pass as a Japanese fisherman (geeze, and some find the Moore films to be cringeworthy. I find Bond goes Japanese far worse than anything from the Moore era. This is DAD level stuff).

    YOLT is definitely below average for me, as it sits around 17th place.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Connery walking into that henchman 's punch in YOU gets me every time lol
  • edited September 2014 Posts: 11,425
    RC7 wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    It really is one of the most underappreciated films in the series.

    I don't think it is. It's lauded around these parts by a great many people. There are far better films that are nowhere near as fawned over as QoS.

    Didn't we have this before? You see there is a reason why I don't contribute to the Skyfall appreciation thread. ;)

    I'm not knocking QoS, I like it. I merely think it's fawned over to excess by some. Films like LALD and TSWLM are far superior, but no one feels the need to be overtly mawkish about them. Perhaps it's because they stand on their own and aren't in need of apologists to reinforce their impact.

    A fair point RC7. I dont see the same level of apologists ready to stand up for other flawed entries in the series such as YOLT and MR.

    Seems to me there is a snobbishness here that because of QOS's pretensions to be serious and arty people think it should escape the criticism of other lackustre Bond films.

    Sorry to say it but YOLT and MR hold together better and are more competently made films than QOS.

    The great shame is that QOS couldve been great but due largely to the script difficulties (although a lot of blame should also reside with Forster for his 'bullet from a gun' pacing crap, the editing and minor gripes like insisting MK Dons do the title sequence) it is alas a missed opportunity. This is where I think the sadness should lie - I dont really see how people can defend it to the point of calling it a great entry. Its plainly not, but it could have been - thats the tragedy.

    Arty? Well it depends where you get your art from I suppose. I just find it entertaining and actually a lot less up it's own arse than a lot of other recent entries?

    Faux 'arty' and pretentious? Surely you're referring to Skyfall. Any one for Turner or a bit of Tennyson? FFS! Talk about tedious pretentious middle brow drivel - SF has it in bucket loads.

    And I'll happily defend YOLT, and regularly do on these threads. One of my personal favourites.

    Just need to rewatch MR now.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    I have to admit I don't quite get that one. Would you care to explain?
    Oh MAN! You never saw DIE HARD???

    Sure I did, but never in English. Actually a good excuse to rewatch this great movie during the weekend, when I think about it.
  • @Getafix I think QoS (see: Forster) is definitely up its own ass. Mendes at least pushes forward a "pro-Bond" theme whereas Forster seems completely anti-Bond which, on subsequent viewings, began pissing me off seeing as it is.. you know.. a Bond film.
  • Posts: 11,425
    QoS is often compared to LTK but it occurs to me that it perhaps has more in common with FYEO.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Getafix wrote: »
    QoS is often compared to LTK but it occurs to me that it perhaps has more in common with FYEO.

    Please do not insult the brilliant FYEO with comparing it to Quantum of Bourne, please. It does not belong in the class of greatness where FYEO resides. ;)
  • Posts: 11,425
    It is no coincidence that FYEO starts off with Bond visiting Tracy's grave and finishing off Blofeld. The film is not only about Melina's revenge - it is about catharsis for Bond too. Although he never mentions it explicitly, Bond is helping Melina because he understands what has happened to her - that's why Maibaum put the graveyard scene in there, as a reminder that Bond has been through something similar. So like QoS, Bond is helping a woman achieve her revenge, and working through his own pain as well.

    Add in the some neat, effective action scenes and cool Euro villains and allies and there is more than a little in common. Columbo seems like a similar character to Mathis as well - in the way he's written and cast.
  • edited September 2014 Posts: 7,653
    Getafix wrote: »
    It is no coincidence that FYEO starts off with Bond visiting Tracy's grave and finishing off Blofeld. The film is not only about Melina's revenge - it is about catharsis for Bond too. Although he never mentions it explicitly, Bond is helping Melina because he understands what has happened to her - that's why Maibaum put the graveyard scene in there, as a reminder that Bond has been through something similar. So like QoS, Bond is helping a woman achieve her revenge, and working through his own pain as well.

    Add in the some neat, effective action scenes and cool Euro villains and allies and there is more than a little in common. Columbo seems like a similar character to Mathis as well - in the way he's written and cast.

    So now you are telling me that QoB is an attempt to achieve the same message as FYEO. the idea might be there but at no moment in the movie does it match FYEO in anything. While FYEO is a finished product that delivered a brilliant spy story with Roger Moore starring, QoB feels unfinished, unpolished, copied from a better executed series of movies, pretentious, badly edited (ravished by a pack of wolves I might say). Which is the large difference between FYEO and this attempt at a movie, the suaveness versus whatever the heck they really wanted with this vehicle. IMHO they should ban Forster ever coming near the movie again. rewrite the script, shoot added scenes, re-edit the movie, write a decent title song and add a decent composer of the NON-Arnold variety. Then the movie might be worth anybodies time.

    I still remember the amount of people that had left the cinema during the break, and the cinema owner telling me that this had happened almost every night. If a Bond movie fails to entertain people it is a badly made movie.

    Moderator: Removed profanity
Sign In or Register to comment.