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 actually think I agree. QOS is no masterpiece but I think CR is overrated. SF is Craigs best by a mile imo.
I have exactly the same opinion. Without all the problems it faced I wonder how amazing QoS would have been. For me SF is the best and CR the worst of Craig's tenure.
To be sure. A lot of arty-farty bollocks. CR proved you can have style and substance. Unfortunately Forster thought he was making one big glossy advert. I watched it again the other day to make sure I wasn't be harsh. I don't think I was. It starts promisingly but then, dump White, chase Mitchell, kill Mitchell, lose White, check Mitchell's apartment, trace bank notes, kill Slate, find girl, lose girl, find girl again, kidnap girl, dump girl, go to austria. I don't mind a film with pace but seriously? Fuck all happens. The only plot points are to reference Camille's back story, which is so sloppily acted it's almost not worth having, and mention of the Tierra Project, which is the least exciting McGuffin of all time. What did they expect the audience to do, be shocked into a coma that it's not oil, but water they want! What a twist.
You could just as easily have had Mitchell lead Bond to Austria and go from there. Greene is much more menacing in the Tosca scenes than he is wandering around a dock with his mother's blouse on, flanked by a frankly useless henchman.
At least with Casino Royale there is some kind of plot to engage you from the off. After the Parkour sequence, we have a tonne of exposition and character work. Even before this, we see Obanna, Le Chiffre and White provide the catalyst and grab our attention. Demetrios is established as an interesting character, who has a purpose and place in the story. There is some genuine investigative work from Bond, not just a massive touch screen wall doing all the work for him. It's just better film making all round. Basically thanks to a decent script, and a Director who wasn't operating from the inside of his own anus.
I loved all of Lazenby's and Daltons but Craig could end up being the only Bond who did over 2 films and never made a crap one. Think about it-
Connery had DAF, Moore had AVTAK and MR and Brosnan had DAD. I think CR is overrated and QOS is flawed but by no means are they terrible. I thought SF was his best one yet so it'll be intresting to see if they manage to keep the streak going for Bond 24 and 25.
But yes, Dalton is awesome.
Makes you wonder if each era of the Bond films has only so many good films or ideas...
I loved YOLT when I was a kid but the last time that I watched it - quite a few years back - I found it quite poor. So Connery had a solid first four, then two films that were not very good. I never liked Moore, but I can see how others may like his films - but the quality was up and down over the years. As for Brosnan, I really liked GE but found that every film was a step down from the one before.
So taking out Lazenby and Dalton - all three of their films were quite good or great - Connery seems to be the only one who had a solid streak of great films. I rate both CR and SF as great, and QoS as good. So I agree that Craig has never made a bad Bond film yet but Connery's early run is king.
Interesting 4 film theory. I'm sure theres been a thread on it but just because I'm bored at work I've knocked out a quick list of the best 4 film streaks:
DN-TB: 1 brilliant (FRWL), 2 good (DN, GF), 1 average (TB).
GF-OHMSS: 1 brilliant (OHMSS), 1 good (GF), 2 average (TB, YOLT).
TSWLM - OP: 4 good (, TSWLM, MR, FYEO, OP).
OP - LTK: 1 brilliant (TLD), 2 good (OP, LTK), 1 average (AVTAK).
TLD - TND: 1 brilliant (TLD), 2 good (LTK, GE), 1 average (TND).
DAD - SF: 2 brilliant (CR, SF), 1 average (QOS), 1 f**king awful (err.. DAD obviously).
So from that entirely scientific analysis DC only needs to make Bond 24 half decent to have the best run of four of in the series.
And of the three other actors to have runs of 4 even in the unlikley event that Bond 24 is as bad as DAD he'll still average out as 2nd behind Sean.
There's a lot of LALD the novel which could be adapted into a film; I wonder if DC is as fond of the book as he is of the film...
I thought Skyfall was hilarious in parts. I laughed more at it than many Bond films of the past.
I agree. There's still the long swim, though.
I once did a double bill of CR and QoS and Royale is easily the better film. Better action, better cinematography and a more developed, more complete story.
Quantum has its moments but feels like a B movie next to CR as the main feature.
Different people have different opinions. There are a lot more things I dislike about CR than QoS, therefore I rate QoS higher than CR, as simple as that.
You're right, everyone has an opinion. In objective terms, CR is a far better film, this is undeniable. If you were to deconstruct both of them, and apply film theory, CR would be light years ahead of QoS. That doesn't mean people can't prefer it to QoS, it just means as an example of film making, there is no comparison.
Spot on Bain. I too have done a double bill of the two and there is a marked drop in overall quality and QOS just seems like an expansion pack or a long series of deleted scenes tagged on the end of CR. As an outright sequel it doesnt really cut the mustard. If you think of it as CR part two its not too bad though.
But I honestly dont see how people can prefer a pretty faithful adaptation of a Fleming novel with a few good action scenes tossed in for good measure over a complete hotchpotch of script, editing and pointless action.
This 'everyone is entitled to an opinion' defence is also starting to wear a bit thin. Why are people no longer allowed to be told when they are just plain wrong?
Ha ha. So true.
But then a person's right might be another person's wrong, when it comes to enjoying a book, a film, a song, etc. I enjoy QoS more than I enjoy CR and there is nothing wrong in that as far as I can see. I don't deny the problems with QoS and I'm not saying CR is a bad film by any means, I just don't enjoy it as much as others. Is it that hard to understand?
That's fine. CR is a better film.
Everyone IS entitled to an opinion and, while we may disagree (sometimes badly) I suppose we have to tolerate it.
For me personally, the PTS, the construction chase, the stairway fight, the poisoning scene, the Miami airport chase (complete with Craig's smile at the doomed bomber), the flippy car crash and the torture sequence all make Royale a more rewarding overall experience*. I'm not saying Quantum doesn't have good scenes. It does! But I don't think it comes together as well. Royale is just a better made film. To be honest I don't see how people can argue that when you compare the action in Casino to the action in Quantum.
*Most of this stuff isn't even in Fleming's book
There are areas where the old 'people are entitled to their opinion' cliche is valid such as saying 'I prefer FRWL to OHMSS'. You cant really argue there - its just a matter of personal taste.
However if someone comes out and says 'I prefer DAD to FRWL' then shouldnt they be told they are an idiot? Everyone bangs on about respect everyones right to hold an opinion but if that really is your opinion you have just lost any respect.
In this instance as I'm not a big QOS hater I'm prepared to cut you some slack Sandy and say fair enough (although personally I think you're round the bend).
However isnt it strange that the 'everyones entitled to have an opinion' brigade suddenly have a volte face when someone delcares themself to be a Nazi or a member of the Klan? All of a sudden your opinion is just wrong and brokers no argument.
Hmmm...Wizard does have a point there. The best thing we can do is show them the error of their ways :p
It isn't a matter of people understanding, but instead accepting. Try to block them out. I can even see why QoS could be the preferred film over CR. It has a fast run that keeps moving along and doesn't stop to take a breather. It doesn't have a lot of the romantic aspects of Bond (with Vesper in this instance) that some people aren't a fan of (the little finger and stripped armor dialogue), and the film alone is full of some great dialogue, scenes and action all more than worthy of merit in the best of what Bond films have to offer. You'll receive no lashings from me for your opinion on this matter, that's certain. But some others, my dear @Sandy, are another story entirely.