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
That would mean that nr. 23 would be an improvement.
Even Flemings novels "spoonfed" their audience to an extent (take the long monologue by Drax in MR).
the plot of the film (cutting off a nation's water supply) is no different in relevance than drugs in LALD - a dumb solar energy device in TMWTGG - the atac in FYEO (which ends up getting destroyed in the end anyway) - Microchips in AVTAK - Opium/Weapons in TLD - Drugs/Stingers in LTK - and Oil in TWINE... i guess because that country is some 'fly spec' that we could care less about - that automatically switches off the part of our brain that triggers compassion for fellow humans - even if it's only a movie...
besides that - the real story of movie was not Water in Bolivia, it was more about Bond himself than it was about a McGuffin' - which was a nice change of pace - as that was the whole point in linking CR and QOS.... it wasn't about building up some uber-maniacal plot to gain world domination - it was about Bond going from 'rookie' to 'pro' - while also setting up a shady organization that Bond can now face for future films - an organization in which QOS firmly established, could care less about world domination - their goal is profits and money... not ruling the world..
Also, I wouldn't actually mind seeing a world domination villain again. At least it would establish a wider threat. I know that the film makes Bond go from rookie to pro but the problem is - CR already did that. At the end of Royale Bond is meant to be the character we know, however in Quantum his abilities as an agent are again questionned.
I can understand what the filmmakers were TRYING to do but it just didn't quite work. The film just seemed... messy.
Even Martin Campbell thought the film somewhat lost its way.
Sitting pretty at #8 on my list at the moment.
However,saying that,it will never improve on that position but i could see it falling a little as i watch the films just below it .
"It just jumps from scene to scene, you dont even know whats going on" Script was weak. "Here's the bad guy, heres the americans blah blah blah"
And as such you can fully understand her reasoning. It is just as she said. It does jump about, the editing causes confusion, so she's justified in her comments.
Equally, some of the examples of worse Bond films given by everyone else are justified, in that the occassional funerial pace of TMWTGG is frustrating, as is the silliness of MR and the flatness of AVTAK.
As ever it's all opinion. And more often than not the fault lies less with the script than with the director.
For me, how can QOS be considered worse than...wait for it, gulp....LTK.
ducks
QoS is really underrated. I think it's a great film. Certainly far from the worst.
One thing's for sure, it's that there are numerous Bond flicks that are much much worse than QOS and that we're not only talking about DAD here, TWINE, TSWLM, TND, and possibly a few more are a few lightyears behind.
Plus, Carly Simon, Richard Kiel, Kurt Jurgens and Roger Moore hammer Alicia Keys/Jack White, Anatole Tubman (Elvis), Mathieu Amalric and (even) Daniel Craig (who was the best thing about the film).
I also thought Goodhead was a bit wooden aswell tbh.
However I do agree that it does have some great locations, an excellent booming score from JB and a cool baddie.
Nonetheless, TSWLM is a far better film. Both Sir Rog and Lewis Gilbert thought so too ;)
Anyway, this is about Quantum.
Moonraker was an extravaganza, a big budget popcorn flick with amazing special effects, done right after the Star Wars craze, there couldn't have been a better choice of flick for the time.
Most of the scenes appear to be edited utilising fast cuts on the idea that this will make Bond more current, more Bourne. However it appears that the QoS editor hasn't established objectives, targets, hazards and significance of events prior to the action scenes. Take, for instance the QoS car chase compared with Bourne's Goa bridge scene - on Bourne, we establish the location, that the assassin is on his heels, Bourne's target (the bridge) - and then we proceed with the chase (fast edits to match the chase). QoS, on the other hand, doesn't identify the objective and the stunts (lorry crashing into car, gun shots, etc) are not able to be processed before the next event occurs (traffic forcing Bond into the quarry).
This lack of establishing shots and outlining the purpose of a scene also affect other sequences, such as the opera scene. On paper, the sequence sounds good (John Woo does Bond?!) - a choreographed montage of action to the soundtrack of the opera performed at the arena. However, the sequence is over complicated - a haemorrhage of events - bad guys and opera aficionados coming in, Bond doing surveillance and spooking the bad guys, Mr White reappearing for no other purpose than to highlight that the Quantum organisation have assembled, a fight scene apparently edited to the opera soundtrack (again, neat idea but edited too quickly/clumsily), dead guys, the PM's advisor's body guard fighting Bond, what?! Even M is confused with the aftermath!!
I hope that Bond 23 gets the right balance between drama and action (probably the best attempt to date has been Martin Campbell with Casino Royale) - I'm still slightly apprehensive of a drama director (Mendes) taking on a action film following Forster's attempt on QoS - would love to see a Michael Mann or especially a Christopher Nolan Bond film! I would also hope that we could see an involving car chase sequence (Bond tailing someone then chasing ala Bullitt), the continued lack of props (invisible car anyone!) and defining of Bond as an agent, rather than a guy hell-bent on revenge - we already have Oldboy! I would also hope that the script writers could invent an introduction of a tense scene with a sniper hunting Bond - at the last moment leading to the famous gun barrel view. =D>
In truth, the outline of DAD too had something going for it, but was plagued by Lee Tamahori's XXX style direction. The same goes for Forster's hyper-action fused art direction that delivers an otherwise interesting story into a mess. With Campbell, especially in CR, we had a well executed film derived from an average to good script.
The thing Royale will always have in its favour was that it was inspired by the original Fleming story. To quote Martin Campbell:
"I felt “Quantum of Solace” completely lost its way. We were lucky on “Casino Royale”, it was the origin story of Bond. Bond had the one and only affair that meant anything to him, and affected him throughout the rest of the series".
The same is true for DAD. That had a promising and...dare I say it...good first half. It was the second that sent it tumbling down - hugely.
NOTE: Campbell seems to have forgotten about Bond's other affair, Tracy!
In terms of the music the title track was rubbish, totally tuneless and didn't lend itself to the film at all, unlike say You Know My Name from CR which figured throughout the film. In terms of the score in places it was good, however in others it felt too clinical and empty, and in general it was not in the same league as David Arnold's CR soundtrack or for that matter his TMND soundtrack (that should have had Surrender as planned as its theme).
Overall the film wasn't the worst and is watchable (the plot was fairly easy to follow) after watching it twice anyway.
As for Bond 23 Sam Mendes hopefully won't make "the same too short" mistake Mark Forster did and at least with him and John Logan on board it should have inteligent undertones.
PS. Christopher Nolan should be the next director, he is a massive bond fan, anybody who has watched Batman Begins can see his Q division slant with Morgan Freeman and Chrisitan Bale. If they are running out of ideas for stories why not use some of the continuation novals as the basis for stories afterall is that what Nolan and Goyer do already on the Batman series and look at how successful that reboot has been.
Re: confusing editing. The first time I saw it, I thought M had been shot in that sequence after the titles. Oops, turns out she wasn't. I ended up seeing the movie a couple of nights later with friends. I watched carefully, it still looked like she got shot, though I knew she wasn't.
For some reason, I've never been motivated to get it on DVD or buy the soundtrack, something I had done for all previous Bonds.
Your mileage may (and likely will) vary.