› ›

Daniel Craig says he had to write QoS scenes. Reason for failure.

2»

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,172
    Unfortunately characters is not the only element that defines that quality of a Bond film. I can easily go with the reasoning presented above by thelivingroyale and BAIN, but I do think that, overall, QoS is the better Bond film.
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    edited December 2011 Posts: 5,745
    Look how well this is tied together. You can hardly even notice a change in his suit, so don't play that argument.



    I just realized, it could be the same lake in both!
  • SharkShark Banned
    Posts: 348
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Unfortunately characters is not the only element that defines that quality of a Bond film. I can easily go with the reasoning presented above by thelivingroyale and BAIN, but I do think that, overall, QoS is the better Bond film.

    Interesting characters, humour and atmosphere are more important with Bond I think, than plot.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    Look how well this is tied together. You can hardly even notice a change in his suit, so don't play that argument.



    I just realized, it could be the same lake in both!

    Yes, the only issue is Bond's sudden change in hair style!
  • ZekidkZekidk
    edited December 2011 Posts: 3,274
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Zekidk wrote:
    BAIN123 - thank you for proving reasons why QoS really suck. IMO, it wasn't the script that destroyed the movie (which I found to be okay), but the editing!

    I'm not saying it sucked completely. Some of it was ok but as a whole it was mediocre IMO.

    Bad choice of word from my part. What I am trying to say is, that QoS - for me - would have been a great Bond-movie, if it hadn't been for the Bourne-style editing. The only place where I actually thought it made sense was during the shootout at the opera.
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    Look how well this is tied together. You can hardly even notice a change in his suit, so don't play that argument.

    I just realized, it could be the same lake in both!

    Maybe it's my monitor, but isn't Bond's shirt light blue in the first part and light grey in the 2nd?
  • 002002
    edited December 2011 Posts: 581
    Agent007391 wrote:
    I thought it was a good movie. It wasn't as bad as Goldfinger, or Diamonds are Forever.

    OpoQQ.jpg?1302279173
  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    Posts: 1,092
    So sick of people saying QoS was a failure. It was a huge, massive success! STFU!
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    The_Reaper wrote:
    So sick of people saying QoS was a failure. It was a huge, massive success! STFU!

    So was DAD.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    The_Reaper wrote:
    So sick of people saying QoS was a failure. It was a huge, massive success! STFU!


    Commercially yes, but artistically/or has a Bond film it was pants but not as pants as DAD so DUM and if so DUSL as you TABOOMA which is nice.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    Look how well this is tied together. You can hardly even notice a change in his suit, so don't play that argument.



    I just realized, it could be the same lake in both!

    Yes, the only issue is Bond's sudden change in hair style!

    And the loss of his waistcoat.

Sign In or Register to comment.