"The Quantum of Solace"

S.A.M. said:
I like Craig as Bond, he looks like the Bond in Flemings books. He's not too good looking but incredibly sexy and fits the part well. He doesn't have to emote, he's 007 not Robin hood. I thought the movie was good, I liked the story line [evil CIA making pacts with dictators :D] and the sharp editing, it was fun. But can be watched once only.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just knew watching it that you'd eat that part up. Though, to be fair, it was just one CIA station chief. He did get some help from a good CIA guy and eventually the station chief was replaced. ;)

Then, of course, there are the scores of bodies that Bond left wherever he went. I swear I'd love to have his life. Such singular purpose.

~String
 
rpenner your dad a fan of "as time goes by"?:p

you forget im australian, we get all the BBC shows:p
 
Theres another problem with the film...the mastermind!
Who is this guy...compared to Blofeld, Stromberg, Goldfinger???

Hes almost completely blank and without character...as if a grocery clerk was substituted at the last moment due to illness.

Bond's nemesis must at least be interesting.

I always liked the cult leader in the old Charleton Heston movie...The Omega Man!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=929ceD32uVo
 
Last edited:
Comparison to previous films in the series:
  • The old Bonds were one-dimensional characters, almost cartoons. This one has feelings and a history, a mind of his own. I like that.
  • As time went on the series came to rely more on Q's gadgetry. That was fun in the 1960s when it was startling, but today there's nothing they can come up with that we haven't already seen on TV, even "South Park," much less "Farscape"! It was nice to have the action come back down to earth like in the very first films with their fistfights.
  • That said, I thought the action was a little too relentless and it overwhelmed the plot. At times I had trouble remembering who he was fighting and why. The movie had characterization and action, but it was very weak on plotting.
  • Nice touch that it was about water. Water will surely be the petroleum of this century.
  • Nice line about M, "Sometimes she thinks she's my mother."
  • I like Daniel Craig. But then I have to admit that until now Roger Moore was my favorite James Bond and apparently a lot of people didn't think he fit the role at all. I don't know how much of it is Craig as an actor versus the skillful way he's being directed.
  • I was thinking to myself that they'd saved on production costs by filming in really cheap locations like Haiti and Bolivia. Then I was amused to find that they actually went to Mexico and Chile.
  • Loved the Jack White song! I wish they'd reprised it over the closing credits.
 
Craig has stated he wants to start the next film on a beach...laughing his head off. Thats a good idea as it will at least create some contrast with the perpetual stiffness of emotion displayed in the last two.

I kept thinking he needs to get himself a kitten...with four legs I mean. :bugeye:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWwBdY1Yglg
 
OK, I have just watched it and maybe I wasn't in the mood, but I found it boring...

I couldn't care who lives or dies and some of the dialogue just bored me. Not to mention a skiny eco-guy as the villain? I did like the part in Italy, I am a sucker for nice locations...
 
I didn't like it very much. No gadgets, not enough catchy lines, too much action, since when is James Bond so emotional?

I guess all those things are different, but that just makes another action movie, not a James Bond movie. I want something like Goldeneye, or From Russia With Love.
 
superstring01 said:
No. Not even close. While all James Bond movies have a certain common element, this one has a totally different storyline. And a damned great one.

~String
Click to expand...

INDEED!
superstring01 said:
Hell no. This is THE most "gadgetless" movie in the entire series. The ONLY cool , futuristic "thing" in the whole movie is a nifty touch-screen optical table that a guy at MI6 uses when talking to bond on the telephone. Nothing else. It's all mind and muscle from that point forward.

~String
Click to expand...

I hated the Brosnan movies for their sheer extravanganza and overdone style. NO character depth at all.
This Bond is everything a secret agent should be.
 
I couldn't agree with you more, Challenger.

There are two camps in Bond films. One camp wants cheesy lines, gadgets and campy, excessive plot intrigue (i.e. Goldfinger using a laser to kill Bond). The other wants action, few gadgets and focus on realistic story and plot.

The thing is, we've seen all the idiotic gadgets in the past thirty years. From Star Wars, Star Trek and other such nonsense, we've become numb to the plethora of odd and creative gadgets. In order to be TRULY original now, you actually have to dispense with the gadgetry and focus on detailed plot and strong action.

I've always been a big Bond fan. I thought the Brosnan ones were okay, but always had this feeling that nobody would hold a candle to the Connery films. Now, looking back at the Brosnan films, I realize how stupid they were and just how great (even better than the Connery ones) the Craig films are, and will be.

~String
 
I grew up reading Fleming. My dad was a fan who had [almost] all the books. So I want the original Bond. Shaken but not stirred.

Its a pity no one has made a movie on Ashenden, Somerset Maugham's secret agent. He was more dashing to me.
 
Also this Bond kills just about everyone who comes in his way. None of the previous ones were so murderous and I am not talking about self-deffense.

I think there should be a fine mixture of a little gadgetry and shapely ladies and realistic stroyline. The first Craig movie was perfect for that. And M believeing that Bond went rouge again is just not believable...

P.S.: A nice realistic touch was in Casino Royale Bond driving a Ford. The producers sure got 10 millions just for that...
 
I just watched Max Payne (depressive) today and he had the same girlfriend than Bond! :)
 
I just got back from watching Quantum of Solace. I give it 3 out of 5 stars. The villain was incredibly weak. He wasn't imposing, he didn't steal any scenes like a commanding villain normally does. Nor did he have any memorable lines. I wasn't really impressed by any of the action sequences, it appeared as if they were trying depict James Bond as Jackie Chan. I missed the days when Bond was smooth and elegant. They're attempting to make the James Bond Franchise to much like the Jason Bourne one. This movie doesn't even compare to the Bourne Supremecy. When I'm watching Jason Bourne, I feel like im watching a super spy. I don't get the same feeling when I'm watching Daniel Craig.
 
Last edited:
Ganymede said:
I just got back from watching Quantum of Solace. I give it 3 out of 5 stars. The villain was incredibly weak. He wasn't imposing, he didn't steal any scenes like a commanding villain normally does. Nor did he have any memorable lines. I wasn't really impressed by any of the action sequences, it appeared as if they were trying depict James Bond as Jackie Chan. I missed the days when Bond was smooth and elegant. They're attempting to make the James Bond Franchise to much like the Jason Bourne one. This movie doesn't even compare to the Bourne Supremecy. When I'm watching Jason Bourne, I feel like im watching a super spy. I don't get the same feeling when I'm watching Daniel Craig.
Click to expand...
So what were the three stars for? You dont seem to like anything about it?

I agree...absolutely the most lack luster villain of any Bond movie.
 
Carcano said:
So what were the three stars for? You dont seem to like anything about it?

I agree...absolutely the most lack luster villain of any Bond movie.
Click to expand...

Well, I really liked the Bond girl:) It was a decent action movie, Daniel Craig was ok. I'm still soured that he turned down the role of Thor. He would of been great along side Ed Nortorn and Robert Downey Jr in the Avengers, but that's another subject:)
 
Its funny how some people expect the villain to be "imposing" and "commanding" I thought the villain was excellent and temporal, seeing as these days its not the ones who are bad we need to worry about, but the ones who reframe their purposes as "to the good" and need to have the chameleon personality to sell it.
 
S.A.M. said:
Its funny how some people expect the villain to be "imposing" and "commanding" I thought the villain was excellent and temporal, seeing as these days its not the ones who are bad we need to worry about, but the ones who reframe their purposes as "to the good" and need to have the chameleon personality to sell it.
Click to expand...

That works in real life, but not in a action movie. The villain in a movie of this magnitude should send chills down the movie goers spine. As we anxiously anticipate his next calculating move while admiring his charming wit. That's until we're shocked and mortified by the sinsiter carnage he exacts onto those who oppose him. I personally didn't experience any of the above from this latest laconic Bond Villain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top