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

dramaticscenesofQOS · January 2013

Quantum07 wrote:

thelordflasheart wrote:

Quantum07 wrote:

QBranch wrote:

How about the lovely Severine? Not your cup of tea?

I LOVED Severine too... All 10 minutes of screen time she had.

Too me this was a good thing - it made her death all the more shocking and unexpected. Would I love for her to be in the film more? Yes. But it's even better to be watching something as formulaic as a Bond film and actually be surprised.

I agree. I think Severine made quite an impact in her brief appearance, but I feel like overall, QoS was stronger in the Bond Girls department

Yes, it did add to the shock value to see her shot so suddenly. It felt like FRWL not because of Turkey but that one scene kinda reminded me of the fight scene in a sense. With her hair down the whole time it just added to the dark atmosphere before the one-liner as the helicopters magically appeared to arrest Silva. I say magically because it was just like in the end of GE when Jack Wade suddenly appears at the right angle with the choppers coming up without making a single sound the whole time as they came up.

Sandy · January 2013

Good to see there are a lot more people appreciating QoS now than when this thread started. Back then we thought we could be counted by the fingers of one hand but we are many more. I think the appreciation for this film will increase with time, similarly to what happened with OHMSS, TLD, etc. @MrBond, I have to say you made the best and most thorough analysis of QoS I ever read, congratulations.

RC7 · January 2013

Sandy wrote:

Good to see there are a lot more people appreciating QoS now than when this thread started. Back then we thought we could be counted by the fingers of one hand but we are many more. I think the appreciation for this film will increase with time, similarly to what happened with OHMSS, TLD, etc. @MrBond, I have to say you made the best and most thorough analysis of QoS I ever read, congratulations.

I don't think QoS is underappreciated in the slightest. It's given far more credit than it warrants. There seems to be a common POV developing that it's cool and subversive to talk of QoS in superlatives. The thing is, it's not just a small band anymore, it's caught on, like all fads. Like all fads I think it will subside. It can't hold a candle to OHMSS or TLD, and I find it a frankly ridiculous notion that you would even bother to make the comparison. For the record, I don't hate QoS, I just find some of the ill-informed commentary on the film, pure nonsense.

SirHenryLeeChaChing · January 2013

Quantum07 wrote:

thelordflasheart wrote:

Quantum07 wrote:

QBranch wrote:

How about the lovely Severine? Not your cup of tea?

I LOVED Severine too... All 10 minutes of screen time she had.

Too me this was a good thing - it made her death all the more shocking and unexpected. Would I love for her to be in the film more? Yes. But it's even better to be watching something as formulaic as a Bond film and actually be surprised.

I agree. I think Severine made quite an impact in her brief appearance, but I feel like overall, QoS was stronger in the Bond Girls department

Severine's too short appearance was a big regret for me but when she was there she made a real impact on the film, even in death. NicNac once told me he felt there was something iconic about the way she looked across the heights at Bond after he killed Patrice, the wind blowing her hair, and I think there's a lot of truth to that much like Jill Masterson became iconic in her even shorter appearance. Add the casino scene where Severine looks so exotically hot like the 60's Bond girls, it's all just so memorable and brought back the feelings I had as a kid watching the likes of Mie Hama, Claudine Auger, and Daniela Bianchi.

QOS was stronger in the women department only because of Camille's screen time, this was a good solid character with real motivations and Kurylenko did a good job with all of it, but I personally felt more impacted by the CR women and Severine. I didn't like the way they dumbed down the looks of the normally glamorous Kurylenko with that haircut and the QOS girls lacked that sizzle factor I look for in a Bond girl. Green, Murino, and now Marlohe had that and then some.

thelivingroyale · January 2013

RC7 wrote:

It can't hold a candle to OHMSS or TLD

Definetly. I appreciate QOS much more than I used to but to be frank, it's crap compared to the likes of OHMSS and TLD.

I think QOS is a good but flawed film. While OHMSS and TLD (which I rate as the 2nd best of the whole series) are brilliant films, two examples of the series at it's best with both being special because they go into what was fairly unexplored territory. I don't really like the comparisons to OHMSS, TLD, LTK, etc. I think it's rating QOS too highly.

They were all the films that were underrated and that have gotten more appreciation but I think OHMSS and the Dalton flicks knock QOS out of the park.

Sandy · January 2013

I have OHMSS and TLD on my top 3, not QoS ;) I wasn't comparing the quality of QoS to those two. I was simply saying that there are Bond films who are more appreciated as time goes by and I believe QoS will be one of those cases.

SirHenryLeeChaChing · January 2013

I think you guys (and girl) mean LTK, a movie like OHMSS that has grown in appreciation. The Living Daylights has always mostly been loved and regarded well.

I agree with Sandy, QOS will be a film more appreciated rather than less as time goes on, it's fits that OHMSS/LTK mold.

thelivingroyale · January 2013

Except it's not as good as OHMSS and LTK :P

SirHenryLeeChaChing · January 2013

thelivingroyale wrote:

Except it's not as good as OHMSS and LTK :P

Obviously, at least in my particular view. Again, still glad to hear QOS moved past DAD in your thoughts B-) DAD belongs there more than any Bond film I can think of.

thelivingroyale · January 2013

SirHenryLeeChaChing wrote:

thelivingroyale wrote:

Except it's not as good as OHMSS and LTK :P

Obviously, at least in my particular view. Again, still glad to hear QOS moved past DAD in your thoughts B-) DAD belongs there more than any Bond film I can think of.

I'd rank it around the 15 mark on my list, not top 10 but it doesn't deserve to be down there with DAF and DAD either.

MrBond · January 2013

Sandy wrote:

Good to see there are a lot more people appreciating QoS now than when this thread started. Back then we thought we could be counted by the fingers of one hand but we are many more. I think the appreciation for this film will increase with time, similarly to what happened with OHMSS, TLD, etc. @MrBond, I have to say you made the best and most thorough analysis of QoS I ever read, congratulations.

Oh, thank you! I'm flattered! :\">

DrunkIrishPoet · February 2013

Although admittedly not without its problems, I too have found QoS to improve upon repeated viewings. I wanted to single out the fight in the ropes on the scaffold as a scene that was not getting its fair share of love from the commentators - very imaginative! Highly original! Something Jackie Chan might do.
But then I read MrBond's amazingly astute essay on the film, and never mind the rope fight - MrBond is not getting enough love on this forum!
Thank you, MrBond, for your insightful analysis. Cheers to you!

lahaine · February 2013

thelivingroyale wrote:

Except it's not as good as OHMSS and LTK :P

I agree but that doesn't mean its not a great film. As with QoS,LTK has a lot of probelms too with it (poor directing, Very tv movie look to it and the bond girls are awful) but it has Dalton Bond and Davi's bad guy that keeps it in my top 10. I agree OHMSS is perfect in every way it's third on my fav Bond films just behind CR and Skyfall.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 · February 2013

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

Getafix · February 2013

Well, I'm not ashamed to admit that QoS is and remains my favourite of the Craig era. It was the first Bond film since TLD that I actually genuinely enjoyed watching in the cinema. I found the simplicity of the story and the pace refreshing after the overlong CR. As I've been saying since joining this site, QoS is only going to grow in appreciation over time. I think Craig's performance is excellent and there is a fantastic cast (the only dud note is Arterton). Good soundtrack from Arnold and in the opera section one of the best and truly Bondian sequences for many years. I still feel that Forster actually got the essence of Bond better than Cambell or Mendes. It is definitely not without flaws but still IMO is a decent little film.CR has many great things about it but is not the masterpiece some make it out to be. Craig and Green are excellent but the film is flabby and too often sags under the weight of its own pretensions. I don't have much more to say about SF apart from 'overhyped'.Keep a close eye over the next year or two as QoS and SF head in opposite directions on many people's rankings.

thelordflasheart · February 2013

Getafix wrote:

Well, I'm not ashamed to admit that QoS is and remains my favourite of the Craig era. It was the first Bond film since TLD that I actually genuinely enjoyed watching in the cinema. I found the simplicity of the story and the pace refreshing after the overlong CR. As I've been saying since joining this site, QoS is only going to grow in appreciation over time. I think Craig's performance is excellent and there is a fantastic cast (the only dud note is Arterton). Good soundtrack from Arnold and in the opera section one of the best and truly Bondian sequences for many years. I still feel that Forster actually got the essence of Bond better than Cambell or Mendes. It is definitely not without flaws but still IMO is a decent little film.CR has many great things about it but is not the masterpiece some make it out to be. Craig and Green are excellent but the film is flabby and too often sags under the weight of its own pretensions. I don't have much more to say about SF apart from 'overhyped'.Keep a close eye over the next year or two as QoS and SF head in opposite directions on many people's rankings.

I would say that he certainly made the most stylish Bond film since the 60s (of course, his style is not to everyone's tastes). As I've said before, I think QoS could be quite good if he had been reined in more.

I'm no fan of Arnold, but like with Forster if he had someone babysitting him he could produce an awesome soundtrack. Some great individual pieces; would it kill him to have a coherent personality for the film by repeating one or two themes like Barry did? Considering how that was the defining aspect of Barry's sound (as much as the "bass and brass" production) you'd think that his biggest fan (Arnold) would have tried to replicate that for more of his films instead of just CR.

And I must disagree with your assessment of Arterton - I think she did an amazing job of injecting a small part with LOADS of personality. Reminded me a bit of Mrs. Peel she did :-)

dramaticscenesofQOS · February 2013

MrBond wrote:

James' arc begins with the second-to-last scene of Casino Royale. "The job's done, the bitch is dead." She's a bitch, and nothing more than that to him. Simple, objective. It's M who preaches temperance, asking him to consider the finer points of the situation, and to explore the possibility that Vesper, in fact, did love him. His response? He hangs up the phone. Can't even listen to such a sentiment, due to his emotional and psychological state. But more importantly, and most critically for his arc in Quantum, he doesn't WANT to listen.

CR ends with a Bond who feels so shattered, and so betrayed, that he feels no morsel of faith in, for lack of a better word, hope. He's seen the most intimate of human betrayals. There is no capacity in him to trust a woman, or to really admit just how BAD the events were that have transpired. We have a Bond who is, essentially, in denial. This is a man who is distraught by more than a woman - but by the WORLD - by circumstances, probably internally asking himself, "is this the low that people, that life are truly capable of reaching? Why even bother fighting this battle?" He is bereft of any motivation in this moment, beyond rage for what he undoubtedly feels is the "unjustness" of the situation. He is quantumless, when it comes to solace.

And yet, his curiosity gets the better of him. He opens up Vesper's phone, and sees his first clue that will lead him on his journey through 'QoS.' This tiny scrap of information, the identity of Mr. White, is the first step toward some kind of answer. Some kind of resolution to the chaos his character is enveloped in as he sits dockside in Venice. And being James Bond, he does what any long running, commercially successful cinematic hero would do. He doesn't put in his papers, so to speak. He puts a bullet in White's knee. What we have at the end of Casino Royale is a Bond who has no faith in people, total disregard for the system (or rather agency) that produced their betrayal, no patience for anyone interrupting his mission to find some kind of justification. But most importantly, we have a Bond who has been confronted by REALITY - and can't believe it. If this is the world into which he's fallen, can he really sustain himself in it? Can the world be SO cruel? I make it sound like he's whining about it, and internally he might be.

And thus, QUANTUM begins.

Forgetting all the pseudo-psychological battle above, Bond remains absolutely - pissed. The love of his life HAS just died. M immediately questions his mental state, which we (the audience) immediately knows to be less than admirable, given his lack of sleep and the emerging alcoholism. (Side dig: Flemingesque? Methinks.) Bond's conflict is immediate. He assures M that the company line, that duty, is his first priority. She's worried it's not, she's worried she can't trust his judgement - as, of course, he surreptitiously pockets a photo of Yusef. Bond is smart enough to know that if he's going to pursue his answers, his PERSONAL answers, he's going to have to do it on his own time. And yet his sense of duty remains. He makes it amicably through the interrogation (well, relatively) despite the obviously simmering rage beneath the surface. Bond is conflicted, he's not sure of his place in the system, and he's drawn by a simultaneous sense of duty and leaning toward personal justification/satisfaction. Good place for an arc to start.

Flash forward to Mitchell's apartment. Bond seems utterly unsurprised at Mitchell's betrayal, for good reason - all those listed above. If he's got no faith in trust, why should he be. Contrast that with M, who is positively rife with paranoia, still in shock. Bond remains cool. The lack of integrity simply doesn't surprise him. This scene, to me, exemplifies his absolute disdain for what's happened to MI6 as an institution.

The initial sequence in Haiti serves to further Bond's arc in M's eyes, that he's off the rails on rage, killing whomever crosses his path to get the Organization. He's not thinking "big picture," to take it back to Casino Royale. She figures he's making it personal, and yet he never really does anything to suggest he's not simply taking a solid run at Quantum. It shows Bond learning to control his personal rage, and focus on the mission. Sure, there's conflict happening - but he manages it. Definition: character development. Keeping in mind, Bond has lost faith in this system - "life" - does it not make sense that he should be somewhat indifferent to death? Many reviewers have referred to Bond by this point in the film as nothing more than a mindless terminator, and yet they fail to realize this is a crucial step in one of his main arcs in the film.

Then, it starts getting interesting. Post opera - M's position even further solidified, as Bond has accidentally killed a member of special branch. 007 himself is obviously surprised by the man's identity, and dare I say it - taken aback by his own actions. The look on Daniel's face sells it, on the phone. He generally starts to question whether or not he should be plowing through these people with so little disregard for consequence or discretion (gasp! more character development!). He rationalizes the situation before he hangs up: "But right now, I need to find the man who tried to kill you." Yeah, sure James. He's doing what Bond does - placating M - in order to keep this mission moving. He's thinking like James Bond should, given his general awesomeness as a character and his newfound lack of faith in the institution. He's smart enough to realize his own mistakes, and tone it down. And he's ALSO smart enough to realize that MI6 at this point will just hamper him by bringing him in and off Greene's trail, allowing Greene, Quantum, and thus his own PERSONAL answers and motivations to slip even further away. For the good of all three concurrent "missions," and because he's Ian Fleming's James Bond, he disregards the order (note, M doesn't seem particularly surprised) and goes "off grid," for want of a better phrase. Bond is learning, he's forcing himself to be clever, he's re-shaping his own opinions and actions in the light of what's happening around him - and yet, not in a reactive sense. He remains active about it, the makings of a well-written character. And development, by God, everywhere!

Then, we bring in Mathis. And it gets even better.

Up until this point, Bond has not even started to question whether or not Vesper loved him. It's been about larger issues. Mathis plants that seed, and thus increases Bond's big picture thinking even further through intimate example. Mathis thinks Vesper loved Bond, Bond claims "right up until the moment she betrayed me." It echoes his sentiment from the final boat scene in Venice, CR. He's still not quite ready to hear it. The most telling line in the scene is Mathis', "she died for you." The way he says it is just perfect. It's such an afterthought, so subtle, like Mathis is so removed from the situation. As if he's thinking to himself, "this poor bastard doesnt' get it, but he will." Mathis comes across exactly as he's supposed to in this scene, as an older, wiser man with something about the world to actually IMPART that would be useful to Bond. And Bond, being the not-quite-developed 007 he is, takes it in and is pushed a little farther along that journey while still not being able to concede any truth in the fact that Vesper might have been less than totally evil.

The plane. Bond can't sleep, he's possessed by his concurrent mission. He's drinking, apparently that's what Bond does quite a bit of (Flemingesque again, how many drinks does he take in this film?) . Mathis is perfectly aware of what Bond's problem is, of "what's keeping him awake," and yet he asks. He gives Bond the opportunity to share, and 007 again deflects. Classically an element of his character. "It takes something to admit you were wrong," Mathis admits as being his rational for accompanying Bond to Bolivia. In this one line, we see what Mathis sees: the developing Bond, not towing the party line, thinking for himself. Mathis makes a true point. Had some nameless MI6 agent shown up to ask for his help in South America, I dare say Mathis would have told him where to shove it. But he goes with Bond, because he sees a damaged man who needs help, and has perhaps earned the benefit of the doubt - or at the very least, earned the benefit of some assistance. Bond won't accept medication, and yet he'll drink himself under the table. Nice little bit of anachronistic hipocrisy there. Mathis knows what it's all about. "Some [pills] make you forget." Bond throws him the briefest of looks, as if to admit "Yeah, yeah, I know." This whole scene precipitated on the fact, of course, that Bond was sitting at a bar simply staring at a photo and the Algerian Love Knot. A rather simplistic statement on his state of mind.

Bond, THE Bond we know, continues to emerge. He won't stay in the ty Bolivian hotel, like Jason Bourne would prefer. He goes for the biggest and the best - Fleming's edict, practically verbatim. And he's clearly developing a taste for the finer things (some people say he's not) while maintaining his disdain for elaborate covers and aliases (a nicely written point from Casino Royale, evocative of Sir Ian), and being generally humorous throughout. And Fields. Oh, Fields. There is no more classicaly Bondian moment than in the hotel room between the two. Here is this 'incorruptible,' young, straight-faced office girl trying so desperately hard to be a spy, who won't take any form of resistance. In order to further his own goals, Bond has two simple options: subdue the girl, or do what James Bond does. He chooses correctly, and the audience ends up with a scene that is particularly memorable and evocative of classic Bonds past. Bond's development continues - he's clearly become comfortable with using sex as a tool, and he's being just ever so slightly misogynistic about the whole thing. Getting closer to 007 all the time.

At the party - yes, the Greene comments feel tacked on. But only initially. Someone made an excellent point above, about Greene having venomous words as his only weapon when Bond outdoes him, physically, in terms of intimidation. There can be no classically archetypal image than that, considering the entire angle of Greene's character (all bark and no bite, the image of what "corporate" magnates truly are at a basic human level, or so says the film) and how awesome the audience needs Bond's character to come off as. Bond brushes aside Greene's comments, just one more thing he doesn't have time for. You're asking yourself, why does Bond just take Greene right then and there, haul him out of the party, and get his answers?

Because he's thinking big picture. He's developing. He's struggling to balance duty and personal need.

I'm sure Bond would like to torture answers out of him, then and there. You can see the fury simmering behind Daniel's eyes, not unlike during White's interrogation. But he holds back. He thinks logically, for two reasons. One: like M's been drilling into him, big picture. Bond, at this point, still has NO idea what Greene is up to. His dutiful obligation to the greater mission drives him toward finding out, and he knows that based on Camille's knowledge of the man, she can lead him to THOSE answers. And reason two: Bond is outnumbered, out of position, and it would simply be a rash decision to pull Greene out. It would go against everything he's been learning so far about impulse killing, and uncalculated moves. The slow development, as it's been happening through the film, toward a thoughtful assassin. He's graduated from killing blindly by this point.

At least, that's all I read from that scene. Whether or not those points are executed well...

Mathis' death is another blow. This scene demonstrates how cold Bond has become to death, even to his closest "friends." Sure, he's pissed, you can see it - Mathis was "the only person he thought he could trust." And the man literally dies in Bond's arms. Yet Bond has already dispatched the guards, there's no further revenge that can be taken (at the moment). So he does what any logical spy would do. He dumps the body, and he PUSHES FORWARD. He even pauses just long enough to think of emptying Mathis' wallet beforehand. This isn't an offhanded gesture, and it's meant to be funny. It's Bond salvaging a lost situation, pressing forward through the direst of circumstances, with a clear head. It's a statement on his entire mindframe, and as I said, a testament to just how frighteningly comfortable he's become in this world.

Bond/Camille in the desert. This is where Camille emerges as a useful character tool, a mirror for Bond. He sees himself in her, quite literally - or more pointedly, what he might become. I think Bond feels pity for the girl. She's obviously consumed by revenge, and it's affected her life. I think that in the sinkhole, in that one instance of her story, Bond sees two things. First, an echo that the "horror" of the universe isn't central to his own view, and that things which are just as bad happen to other people. In that instance, his view of the world's ultimate evils is diluted ever so slightly, as he starts to realize that he's fighting against the tide. That for every unfortunate thing that's happened to anyone, there's always going to be something worse happening to someone else. Bond isn't simply listening to Camille's story. These thoughts are running through his head. The thoughts that human corruption, evil, all those things - they are universal. They extend beyond MI6, Quantum, and his situation with Vesper. And in this one, simple scene, Bond's view of the entire world is further - *cough* developed *cough* - just a bit. Camille turns the conversation toward him just once, and he immediately suggests they should leave. He still can't talk about Vesper.

Grand Andean hotel. Bond's "disappointed," but not just in M's apparent pandering to the Americans. In her lack of faith in him. The audience knows he's struggling with his duty/personal balance up until this point, but we also KNOW he's in control, and that he was making headway against Quantum. M knows he's struggling, but assumes he's not in control. She gives a very frank, if (maybe not wholly) incorrect assessment of his mental state, that he's been blinded by his own thirst for revenge. He disagrees, deflecting, although probably being very personally aware of how it must appear to everyone else that he's walking that line. And then Fields' death.

"Why?"
"It's just mis-direction-"
"I mean why HER, Bond."

And, queue the stunned look on 007's face. It had never even entered his mind. You can hear Arnold's score practically thud with this hammer of a beat on Bond's character arc. No doubt his connection to Fields was humanized more by their intimate day together, but he very suddenly feels remorse. Henchmen and thugs be damned - Bond is finally confronted with a very real, very emotional consequence of his actions. Fields was not all that far removed from Vesper as a character, being a paper-pusher who got caught up in the dirty side of espionage. And in a few simple lines of dialogue, M delviers a scathing critique of the history of James Bond, and of the man standing in front of her. His charm is deadly. Is there a more nostalgically cliched 007 statement? (Of course, nostalgically cliched in a good way). Very telling is Bond's reaction when "giving in" to the MI6 guards escorting him away. He simply looks fatigued, wiped - a situation Fleming's Bond might have founda at the bottom of the OHMSS ski run, for example. H's ready to give in. And then, through a tricky bit of editing, we see Fields' dead, naked body quite literally on Bond's mind. A plan starts formulating, and he makes the snap decision to take down the MI6 agents in the elvator. It was in this image of Fields, this consequence of his INACTION (via leaving her alone), that he decides to take ACTION. So what does he do? (In the funniest moment of the film) he returns to M about 20 seconds later, bereft of an escort, to re-iterate that the girl deserves more credit than to be a simple casualty. That's all. He doesn't make M privy to his plans, perhaps to avoid her being considered an accessory to his actions should some kind of official review be undertaken. Then he walks away, confident in her trust in him. She doesn't try to stop him, or tell the agents where he's gone. Why? What's changed in their relationship since she was reaming him out a moment ago?

Nothing, overtly. Because part of her "talk" was an act, and because Bond has developed to the point where he's reading, accurately, his relationship with M. In that sole instance of not stopping him, M offers him (if not subconsciously) an opening to really become an ally, to make her a part of his efforts to circumvent "the system" in order to quite simply get things done. And he takes it. Bond's starting to recognizes his true allies, and his world is improving for it. "You and I need to see this through," he tells her. She doesn't debate. She merely points out there's a capture-or-kill order out on him. Their relation ship has matured to the point that they understand each other without so many words.

Perla des las Dunas. You can see Bond struggling, wanting to drop Greene in to the fire when holding him by the hair. He might even be about to do it, we won't ever know - because of Camille's gunshot. "Sounds like you just lost another one!" Up until that point, the film was a pulse-pounding mixture of visuals and sound as Bond and Greent threw themselves at each other, when suddenly, 007 is confronted by the very real possibility that his last ally - and a mirror for himself - has been killed. As a result of Bond's actions, indirectly. As a result of her own obsession, directly. And in that moment of stark relief, brief mental clarity from the cacophony of whatever else was going on, Bond pulls Greene up and runs to Camille. Call it a mixture of Bond wanting to save the girl, Bond's guilt over his perceived concurrent responsibility for her "death" with Fields', Bond's fear at being consumed by his own need for revenge like Camille, or Bond's simple tiring of constant death. His realization is complete, in terms of thinking big picture. He runs to Camille, and finds her, cowering. He cradles her not unlike he did with Vesper in the Hotel Splendide shower. It's no symbolic irony that this time, they're surrounded by fire. The imagery evokes a classical definition of hell, where these two characters find themselves. Consumed by revenge, with no one to cling to except their own existance, and absent of anything better in the world outside. Camille appears most affected, obviously mortified at dying the same way as her family - there could not be a more horrifying reality for anyone than her, in that situation. In her quest for revenge, Camille has fallen into the very circumstancial injustice she was trying so hard to rectify. 007 sees it.

Bond seriously contemplates mercy-killing the girl. I think, personally, he was even beyond contemplation. That is untouched territory for a Bond film, and in that single act, we see a microcosm of Bond's entire point of view on what life has become.

We talked about how he doesn't see any justice in the world. About how the world is essentially a burning room frought with danger, betrayal, nothing to cling to, except your own physical existance. And even that might not be enough to succeed. There's no point in playing, the house always wins, so why bother?

We'll never know if Bond would have contemplated his own suicide as well, and it's irrelevant. He sees one singular opening, one chance to get out, as risky as it might be that the blowback from the exploding fuel cell might kill both of them as well. And in the single moment of the film where he takes the biggest step toward becoming James Bond, he shoots out the fuel cell. In that moment, Bond seems to realize that despite his definition of life, despite the futility of the whole thing - there's just no sense to be had for not trying. For giving up. And with that gunshot, James Bond ironically declares "war" on the world, on the hell that threatens to envelope him, and emerges from Perla des las Dunas a far more deadly man than when he entered. He's seen how dangerous the world is, how unjust it can be, and yet he's also seen why an attitude such as Camille's (or his at the beginning of the film) can pull you FARTHER down into the mess. And that just wouldnt' be practical, would it?

Bond's abandonment of Greene in the desert is a character statement, multifold. It's obvious symbolic retribution for the death of Fields. It's an obvious indication that Bond has become more than a "mindless" killer. It's just ever so-slightly sadistic, as Bond of the books was capable of being. Case in point, the OHMSS (constant references are because I'm re-reading) novel, one of the Piz Gloria guards throws a man down the bobsled run, and Bond muses that should he encounter any guards in his escape, he would be sure to "hit them extra hard!" This is all, of course, after Bond has the answers he needs. And let's not discount the fact that it's purely James Bond-ish in execution.

The train station. Minimal dialogue, but maximum effect. There's just not much left for these two people to say. Bond sees (and hears) the emptiness Camille feels with her consuming obsession resolved, and in turn sees the danger in such a choice were it made with his own life. Bond has, essentially, graduated from the attitude of revenge. Not retribution, mind you, but cold-hearted, simplistic, objective, revenge. Bond doesn't think the dead care about vengeance, akin to how some people say "funerals are for the living." It comes on the heels of Camille wondering how her family feels. Bond's deduction is a product of the fact they're probably not happy their daughter and sister took HERSELF so close to death in order to avenge them. "Before setting out on revenge, you must first dig two graves," I believe someone, somewhere, said sometime before . That may be an overly simplistic way of looking at it, but I don't think it's ever meant to be complicated.

The confrontation with Yusef. Brilliant. Bond gets his "revenge," but it's far more calculated and ultimately satisfying than any mere killing any could have been. He systematically destroys this man's existence in front of "Vesper," and leaves him a snivelling weasel on the couch, beggy not for mercy, but for ease in his death. Could there be a more perfect reflection on Bond's view of what life is? Bond has been through torture over Vesper (literally and emotionally), he sees a world consumed by endless danger and difficulty. And yet he's prepared to kill Yusef, to expunge him from existance (maybe), and this greasy douchebag asks for the easy way out. In that single instance, perhaps Bond sees that killing Yusef would give the man some form of release that he simply does not deserve. Daniel plays it perfectly. Bond is still obviously full of rage, and reacting realistically with the sudden face to face confrontation with Yusef. I'm sure Bond is struggling not to pull that trigger. Bond doesn't kill him, for all the reasons he didn't kill Greene, and all the reasons he hasn't killed at any particular time throughout the film. Yusef is just too valuable alive. And most importantly, it is a definitive statement on the crucial relationship between Bond's personal vendetta and his mission:

He CHOOSES the mission. Expunging the worry everyone else had. Why? Because he's James Bond, that's why.

The Final scene with M. Full of logical dialogue that succinctly states "where Bond is," with the key all in the delivery. "The right people kept their jobs." Bond's view of the entire system is not without a sense of jutice, and he's pleased with the outcome. "Wish I could help," regarding the circumstances of Greene's death. He communicates it in such a way that it's obvious - he knows, that she knows, that he knows what happened. And he doesn't care. It's Bond's foreknowledge that sometimes, the institution isn't always right, and that his own instincts prevailed. Were he to have listened to them and come in to "report" after Austria, Greene would have likely been in control of Bolivia's water supply by that point. This line is a statement in Bond's confidence - in his own deicisions.

"Congratulations, you were right."
"About what?"
"About Vesper."

Correct me if I'm wrong, this is the first time he speaks her name in the film. He can finally talk about it. It's a direct call back, contextually, to their final conversation in Casino Royale. It's Bond's admission of subjectivity, his allowance for discussion, and his graduation from the point of view where the world is a cold place with no redeeming qualities. It's his quantum of solace, that small measure of knowledge that the greater qualities of the world are, in some respect, redeemable. It's his acknowledgement that she did, in some part, love him. And I imagine that in some small measure, he's forgiving her for her betrayal, realizing (upon Greene's offscreen interrogation and confrontation with Yusef) the logical reasons why she would have fallen for Quantum's scheme. And even more importantly, in a call back to Mathis' final words - he's forgiving himself. Because the end of CR and beginning of QoS, his anger was self imposed - for being so stupid. He couldnt' believe he allowed himself to open up, to err so egregiously, which is why when QoS begins he shuts down. Now, he's forgiving himself for making a mistake. For being human. Perhaps slowly, but his wounds have healed (or at least started to).

"I never left," delivered as if to say, "What were you worried about?" It's one final nod to the film's overall theme: trust. Arguably, Bond (on "paper") had the mission on his mind the entire time. He delivered Quantum operatives and stopped their plot, and I'm sure all official reports would reflect that. It makes his "Congratulations, you were right" line even more powerful in retrospect, when you realize that he's offering one small window of trust, insight to M - his personal problem. They have no reason to really talk about that, in light of the fact that she's his boss. But they do, and that's why their relationship is "solidified" as the filmmakers might say, and that's why Judi was in the film so much.

Wow, my fingers hurt. So, the short version:

BEGINNING OF QOS
Bond is emotionally shut down, angry, spiteful at the "unjust" world around him, vengeful for the people who have done this to him, and right pissed.

END OF QOS
Bond realizes the world will always be this way, dangerous and unforgiving at every turn, and to hope for anything else from his (human) point of view is perhaps asking too much. He realizes that subjectivity is important, that a cold attitude toward Vesper's betrayal or mindless killing of endless thugs just isn't practical (situations of self-preservation not witshtanding). And most importantly, based on his delivery of the last line (and perhaps the expression on his face), he's got a sense of irony about the whole thing. It's so ridiculous, it's a joke - he might think about the world. Leading him down a path of using humour as a tool of deflection to mask danger or how frightened he might actually be - a "defense mechanism" - which is, in my opinion, the absolutely spot-on soruce of character motivation for James Bond's sense of humour.

BRAVO!!!!! BRAVO!!!!! Critics need to read this before brushing this gem of a film off. BRAVO!

thelivingroyale · February 2013

lahaine wrote:

thelivingroyale wrote:

Except it's not as good as OHMSS and LTK :P

I agree but that doesn't mean its not a great film. As with QoS,LTK has a lot of probelms too with it (poor directing, Very tv movie look to it and the bond girls are awful) but it has Dalton Bond and Davi's bad guy that keeps it in my top 10. I agree OHMSS is perfect in every way it's third on my fav Bond films just behind CR and Skyfall.

It looks a bit cheap sometimes but how are the Bond girls awful? Pam (who I think was the best Bond girl of the series) was a tough Bond girl without getting in the way trying to be Bonds equal all the time and Lupe was good eye candy. And please name a scene that's an example of the poor directing because I can't think of any.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 · February 2013

Pam is awesome, and I can't wait to see LTK again just to examine her character more. I love that at the end (near the climax with Sanchez and his boys) she lets Bond go and take care of HIS personal business while she flies off to help later instead of getting in the way of his revenge. Now THAT is a Bond girl. I hate the ones that feel they have to cower by Bond for safety or get up on a ladder to try and stack up with him.

For this moment, the bar fight and her overall toughness alone, Pam is one of my favorite Bond girls right up there with Vesper and Natalya, women of that same ilk. I guess I have a think for the strong independent types. :\">

dramaticscenesofQOS · February 2013

Sad how LTK was so forgotten and pushed aside through many years. It feels like QOS was the closest film we had to it.

lahaine · February 2013

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

I know i said that about LTK

hoppimike · February 2013

I adored this film. The variety of locations is beautiful, the storyline is textured and fun to pick apart, modern and yet building on Casino. Greene is a great villain, subtle and well constructed.

Down sides... a bit shallow when compared to Casino. Not as captivating start to finish compared to Casino... but that's the thing, it only really pales a little when compared to Casino Royale, and even then I think the wonderful variety of scenes and vibrance it has save it quite nicely.

Overall, I love this movie!

Oh and let's not forget the opera house scene!

SaintMark · February 2013

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

It does have indeed have its beautifull moments

hoppimike · February 2013

SaintMark wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

It does have indeed have its beautifull moments

Agreed! I think it's absolutely gorgeous ^^

fire_and_ice · February 2013

There are many Hitchcokian elements in QoS, some of the imaginary is finite bond for me. The narrative is admittedly its weak point for well documented reasons. I would certainly put QoS n the expressionist bond category.

chrisisall · February 2013

Basically my favourite Craig Bond. So far.

Villiers53 · February 2013

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

Now your just being sarcastic again - naughty boy. You know it was crap from start to finish!

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 · February 2013

Villiers53 wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

Now your just being sarcastic again - naughty boy. You know it was crap from start to finish!

Hell no. QoS is a gem.

BUT IT COULD NEVER BE AS GOOD AS ROGER MOORE'S BOND FILMS, THE EPITOME OF IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007.

Now THAT is sarcasm.

RC7 · February 2013

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Villiers53 wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

Now your just being sarcastic again - naughty boy. You know it was crap from start to finish!

Hell no. QoS is a gem.

BUT IT COULD NEVER BE AS GOOD AS ROGER MOORE'S BOND FILMS, THE EPITOME OF IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007.

Now THAT is sarcasm.

I'd genuinely watch any one of Rog's movies over QoS, and I include the much maligned AVTAK in that.

thelivingroyale · February 2013

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Villiers53 wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

QoS looks nothing like a TV movie. It is one of the prettiest Bond films around.

Now your just being sarcastic again - naughty boy. You know it was crap from start to finish!

Hell no. QoS is a gem.

BUT IT COULD NEVER BE AS GOOD AS ROGER MOORE'S BOND FILMS, THE EPITOME OF IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007.

Now THAT is sarcasm.

I think FYEO is more Fleming esque than QOS and I like QOS but I think TSWLM and OP are leagues ahead of it, and FYEO and LALD are better too. More consistent, more entertaining, better plots, better action scenes, better theme songs, etc.

Even AVTAK has a better villian, score and theme song. In fact I'd say in terms of entertainment value every single one of Rogers films beat QOS. In terms of how good the films are, I stand by the first bit of my post.

Reporting For Duty

Categories

In this Discussion

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

Comments

Reporting For Duty

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

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

Comments