James Bond and The Quantum of Solace

Vs. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

This sounds like it should be a one of those high-falutin' food threads

Next up, James Bond and the Order of the Phoenix.

with a title like that clearly Mika will perform the title theme

I had 65daysofstatic pencilled in

Is this the name of a new Bond film?

Surely not?

Some plot details:
http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=21851

I like the idea of a South American setting, don't think he's been there since Moonraker.

Mathieu Amalric says his villain will not be a larger than life figure. He said "He's not an over the top villian...No scars, no metal jaw - he is nude"

Title more Harry Potter than Harry Palmer, n'est-ce pas?

Interesting write-up on the original story here (way better than wikipedia's barely comprehensible summary)
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=973639

This is superb.

Just to be clear here people the title is just called

"Quantum of Solace"

still a bit too hippy for my liking though

Bit prog

Theme song by Jon Anderson and Coheed and Cambria.

"Bond falls out of a treeeeeee"

sounds like an Astral Projection song

what does it mean?

don't really care, this film is gonna kick ass.

ledge's link explains the meaning

shit is deep

Soooo hype

So this is going to be a romcom about Bond trying to find a ladyfriend?

Or at least some mates?

The Quantum Menace

Key thing is that the title has two "O"s in it for 007 purposes.

There's no way that title doesn't get changed

I hope you're right. Shittiest title I can imagine.

James Bond and the Qualia of Conjugal Fulfillment

James Bond and the Potential for Either Solitude or Engagement

James Bond and the Sickness Unto Death

James Bond and the Fortress of Solitude:

http://www.technovelgy.com/graphics/content07/fortress-of-solitude-superman.jpg

Winner: Dumbest Title of the Year.

Take a bow, Mr. Bored, James Bored.

I don't like this new, emo, James Bond. I blame that Bourne dude.

people, the theme song must only be by stereolab

Producer Michael Wilson said the film would have "twice as much action" as 2006's Casino Royale, which saw Daniel Craig debut as the iconic secret agent.

The premise of this film sounds really good but I thought Casino Royale had plenty of action. Don't wanna go all Pirates of the Caribbean II and III on it, overwhelming the film with flashes and bangs, and forgetting that that was really only a part of the reason why people thought the previous one was so good.

ugh - just thinking about PotC II makes my head hurt.

From the link up top by Ledge, there are no guns in this movie ?

that's assuming they stay true to the original text. which they won't.

haha, no -- it's just a title; it won't have anything/much to do with the story.

xpost

but presumably it won't "just" be a title and will bear some relation to the text, if not strictly adhere to it. i say that naively hoping it to be true rather than actually believing it.

Michael Wilson said the name had only been decided "a few days ago", adding the story's start point would be "literally an hour after the last film left off".

This is interesting, I think.

yeah... though pre-credits sequence is best when out-of-narrative y/n

people, the theme song must only be by stereolab

-- Tracer Hand, Friday, 25 January 2008 11:18

ftw!

Bond is cut up over Eva Green's death but he's still gonna make it with two different women in this movie duh

we all deal with grief differently.

Did anyone else see Olga wotsit in The Serpent? I'd deal with my grief with her any time. Actually, she was super badbondgirlish in that film.

haha

http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2252778,00.html

SPOILERS

amalric looks comfortable.

why are they bothering giving away such a crucial plot point in that article? i know it warns you but why would ANYONE reading that article want to know that in advance?

There are people that do like to skip to the ending of a book.

And here's the teaser poster...

http://commanderbond.net/resources/sections/news/images/4861_qos_teaser/qos-teaser.jpg

http://www.dan-dare.org/Dan%20Saber/StarWarsEpisodeI1.jpg

http://galerie.pampuch.cz/images/alba/nahledy-velke/korn_korn.jpg

a plausible follow-up to chris cornell, too

mmm, that poster looks a little shady

Yeah, the actiony bits are good, but not the totality of why Bond flicks are enjoyable. I thought Casino Royale had a great blend of actiony and character bits(both at card table and away). Tho I admit not seeing the film more than once yet.

I mean, a good deal of the fun is Bond proving that he has a set, that he can think up cunning ways to use them to get out of scrapes, without having to show him resorting to just beating guys up.

What's he packing in that teaser poster? An MP5?

Oh yeah, and will John Cleese be in this one? I understood the need for complete "seriousness" in Craig's first outing, but c'mon, we need a grumpy old uncle Q/R harrumping and setting up all the prop tricks we'll see pay off in the next coupla reels or so.

Holy shit, I just realized Pee Wee going to the magic shop was effectively him visiting his Q, only you need to watch the deleted scenes on the DVD to get all the payoffs.

So any bond film with Daniel Craig is part of it's own separate franchise, and I'm pretty stoked about these films. Yeah the poster immediately sez fuck-shit-up bond is back, but the fact that casino royale carefully built up a fourth act in order to leave him all wounded and screwed up is gonna nourish the rest of the series. So action-plus, basically.

yeah kingfish it's a version of the MP5, the same gun he's holding up at the end of CR. I believe this one is slated to begin exactly where the last one left off, standing over a wounded Mr. White. I don't think Cleese or Dench are slated to make an appearance?

oh wait wiki says dench will be in this

actually pretty much the entire movie s already on wikipedia. jesus.

One of the new Bond girls keeps blabbing huge chunks of the plot to journos, apparently.

She'll wind up being fished out of the sea in a net, I guess.

that poster is the last shot of CASINO ROYALE isn't it?

Pacino?

http://www.cinematical.com/2008/02/13/big-bad-bond-villain-revealed/

O_O

man that's what I LOVE about BLOGS!!! you can turn anonymous comments on AICN into NEWS!!! suck on it nick denton check out THAT pageview count

No way is this happening.

This was clearly written by a lexicographer trying to teach people that "quantum" is a noun.

The climax will be an argument about etymology where a dictionary settles a bet and the villain is like "fine, you win, I'll turn off the tsunami device"

pacino?!? who THINKS of this stuff?

he could use his Big Boy Caprice voice

to keep up, deniro will play the villain in the next star trek movie

like both those guys haven't done waaay worse stuff?

Pacino was in the last Ocean's 43 for Godsakes

morbs you seem to be confusing the new bond movie thread with the james bond haters thread

I hope Pacino saved his villain outfit from Dick Tracy!

Also get Dustin Hoffman in there as Mumbles plz.

"Hey Madonna, could you do another Bond theme song for us?"

oh god

with any luck somebody will have the sense to realize tay zonday is the man for the job on this one

"QUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANTUM of SOOOOOOOOOOLace.
Better than the PAAAAAAAALace."

Or something like that.

I nominate woody harrelson for the new blofeld

Tom I liked Casino Royale!

x-post -- White cat, or not?

white cat with a distinctive secondhand pot cough

YES

White cats can't jump

oh see morbs I thought you were blanket-dissing bond by insinuating that pacino would be a perfectly worthwhile villain for the series. he has too much profile, though, it would be like ocean's 13 where he's used strictly for laughs

besides it sounds like a kingpin cameo in the Cinematical thing. Like Bowie as Pilate.

if they ever decide to add a Q or a moneypenny into barbara's reboots they ought to merge them into one seriously nerdy female played by linda cardellini. AM I WRONG?

http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2003_Scooby-Doo_2:_Monsters_Unleashed/2004_scooby_doo_2_011.jpg

"Aw, c'mon 007! Stop messing with that!"

YES

tom is not wrong

I'm beginning to think they might want to reconsider this one part of the filming in Italy to pick up where Casino Royale left off -- first the car goes into the water a few days ago, now this:

A stuntman was seriously injured in a car crash while filming an action sequence for the new James Bond movie on a famously winding lakeside road in northern Italy, a local official said today.

The London-based production company for "Quantum of Solace" said that an experienced stunt driver of an Alfa Romeo car remained hospitalized in serious condition following the accident Wednesday. A second stunt driver in the same car also was injured, but less seriously.

"Filming with the second unit on 'Quantum of Solace' will be suspended while the accident is investigated," the statement said. It noted that neither director Marc Forster, Daniel Craig nor any other cast members were at the location when the accident occurred.

their blood is on Universal's hands for upping the ante so much in B. Supremacy

"lol u drove tank through fake moscow? we drive extremely fast in specially designed camera rig through REAL moscow. also blow up a real actual house in germany while three stuntmen are standing about ten feet away from it"

10 seconds of action scenes has leaked out
http://commanderbond.net/article/5273

Looks like it's part of the trailer.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/06/30/quantum-of-solace-teaser-trailer/

Looks good.

i just hope it has a stiff-backed glamour model riding a horse along a beach like the last one did

i just hope it has a stiff-backed glamour model riding a horse along a beach like the last one did

At the very least, you've got the model piloting a speedboat.

Parts of that teaser remind me of the final scene in Get Carter.

Man, that motorcycle stunt! I have no idea how they got a camera to follow the rear wheel like that.

"Parts of that teaser remind me of the final scene in Get Carter."

Where Stallone is at the funeral?

(haha jus joking I don't actually remember the final scene of the remake.)

theyre leaning heavily on bourne with the bond-running-from-his-own-govt thing

also 'license to kill', noobs

Bond has always operated at the line of being a rogue agent. Thats why he's so effective......and SEXY.

This teaser is fine. Only-- why does the music keeps coming in at intervals, pounding out "shave and a haircut"?

Who's gonna be the lucky star who gets to write a theme song with "quantum of solace" in it?

Lil Wayne!

http://www.zmemusic.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/thom-yorke-rankin.jpg

HI DERE

amy winehouse really woulda been a good choice for bond.

BROADCAST

YOU CAN DO IT

This movie is like the cinematic equivalent of this;
http://modculture.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/05/09/hannah_bond_emo.jpg
Only with the prospect of sex and more tears maybe at the same time
Wino is doing the song according to Mark Ronson which is funny to me since he was bitching about how he 'doubted' it would happen.

i read that she crashed out of the recording session and he's looking for someone new.

Goldfrapp should do this

Indigo Girls have previous experience singing both "quantum" and "solace"

> Wino is doing the song

!!!

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/179/413689400_365c5bbc32_o.jpg

After Chris Cornell, anything is possible.

leonard cohen!

Henry Rollins

John Ashcroft

Broadcast, Goldfrapp, or Hooverphonic please!

John Ashcroft

Ned. Stop making me laugh when I have iced tea in my mouth. Fuck, man.

Seriously people it's perfectly clear the one recording artist who can do justice to the phrase "Quantum of Solace" is William Shatner.

Trying to find my. Quantum of Solace.
The smallest. Amount. Of affection, a person can have for another.
Trying to find some. Meaning in this insane world.
Got to find. That. Quantum of Solace.

arranged for piano, theremin and various percussion

sub-custos and all that I know but LOOK AT THE TITLE

custos disclaimers can't save you from custos

I'm just saying, it's like the kingdom of the crystal skull thread, I didn't start the fire

Ned. Stop making me laugh when I have iced tea in my mouth. Fuck, man.

You ran the risk.

Jack White and Alicia Keys taking over since Winehouse got bumped wtf?

Broadcast, Goldfrapp, or Hooverphonic please!

See, this wish made sense. The final choices do not.

New Trailer

it's gonna be good.

the camera following them as they crash through the glass roof looks good, not sure i've seen that before

yeppers, that's a quality shot, and very close in execution to the 'following' shot of the motorbike jump in the other trailer (and this one.) Looks like the new 'bullet time' effect has been found!

I noticed that shot too, but doesn't the CGI look a bit dodgy? I thought the series was shying away from that stuff now that Casino Royale brought some grit back to the franchise.

Suppose we can thank the last couple of Bourne movies for a new action movie cliche!

Good to see some more Aston Martin time too. And it comes out the day after my birthday!

Review from the BBC. This could be *very* interesting. I am also cheered by the knowledge that it's well under two hours long.

That's almost brave in this day and age. Sick of moaning about over-long movies. More psyched than ever.

Meanwhile, writer Chris Roberts said in his Facebook update that it's a 'witless heap of toss,' so there's that.

i don't think that's even english.

Hmmm, hate to say it but I think Peter Bradshaw in The Guardian has it about right. Definitely feels like a transitional piece of a trilogy and although their's plenty to admire in it, especially Craig's performance it does feel a little perfunctory. I think that Foster has screwed up the action sequences which is pretty unforgivable, he's gone for the vogueish Bourne style hyperkinetic editing which makes everything look like some dodgy shoegazing video from the early 90's, but ultimately drains any tension from the scene. Bourne Ultimatum looks like a chamber piece compared to some of the editing in the early scenes. Nothing as memorable as the parkour scene in Casino Royale though the opening fight on the scaffolding comes close.

Craig however is fantastic once again and makes the role of his own, bringing depth and depth and complexity to what's essentially a pretty one dimensional character. Don't get me wrong this is smarter and more stylish than most other pieces of the genre but the bar was raised by Casino Royale and despite the best efforts it doesn't reach as high.

this is gonna be rad, trust me.

some dodgy shoegazing video from the early 90's

I'm sold!

haha

I knew that would appeal to Ned!

"Heaven Sent an Agent"

"Catch the Gun"

"Leave Them All Dead"

enuff fucking trilogies already

EVERYONE seems disappointed with this. i can't believe they've fucked it up so bad.

magnus loved it:

http://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2008/10/quantum-of-solace-7-as-the-poster-says-an-appreciation/

Title sequence way poorer than Casino Royale.

"Heaven Sent an Agent"

They seriously should have had this as the title, it is much better than the real one.

enuff fucking trilogies already

― s1ocki, Friday, October 31, 2008 10:58 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^

truth bomb

this girl i know has just updated her fbook status to express her disappointment w/the lack of full frontal nudity in this film

Oh dear, just back from seeing QoS and thoroughly underwhelmed. I'm totally pro-Craig, and he was about the best thing in this. Long stretches were unforgiveably dull, the action felt perfunctory and was a real Bourne rip-off with none of the flair, and Amalric has to be the worst Bond villain ever. His expression looked like he was either constipated or about to start crying throughout.

The only bit I really enjoyed was the Tosca sequence, where the music over the firefight worked beautifully. On a musical note, wtf with not using the classic Bond theme at all - I could understand this in Casino Royale, seeing as they were trying to start from a blank slate, but this time out it just felt mean to deny fans that simple pleasure.

either constipated or about to start crying throughout

= best villain ever!!

this girl i know has just updated her fbook status to express her disappointment w/the lack of full frontal nudity in this film

this critic i know wrote a review that said something not dissimilar. well, OK: not so much full-frontal nudity; more swimming-trunks-related action.

i think it's a reasonable point.

here were my problems with it:

- no visible demonstrations of villain's cruelty/dangerousness - when bond finally confronts him in the climactic finale i was expecting almaric to just crumple at the first touch

- bond seems weirdly passive - like a mouse in a maze - he's not demonstrably cleverer than anyone

- isn't he supposed to be a spy? a double agent? the fun of spy stories is the pretending to be someone else, and the consequences if you get found out, right in the middle of the bee's nest. the total disregard for this probably reached its apex when bond and dusky companion arrive at their swanky hotel after an airplane gun battle, a parachute drop, and several hours walking through the desert. they show up at the hotel not having even taken the time to wash their faces! actually this goes beyond spycraft - bond simply wouldn't look that disheveled, for that long. the man has principles.

- every action scene involving a vehicle was 75-90% incomprehensible. where are the vehicles, who is driving towards whom, who is winning - all was gobbledygook

things i liked:

- the fight scene on the scaffolding - tremendous!

- that Fields was obviously wearing absolutely nothing under her short trench coat

every action scene involving a vehicle was 75-90% incomprehensible. where are the vehicles, who is driving towards whom, who is winning - all was gobbledygook

hi dere every single modern action film

yeah i think something has been lost now that every action director feels the need to "show you what it's like" to be in the middle of a car chase, all shaky cameras and super close-ups and crazy editing. there should be more shit like 'ronin' and less like "bourne escaping cops in moscow" imo.

Exactly, we need a return to the old style crashing into a melon stall style car chase.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1129442/

exactly - bourne and whatever statham's character is called actually beat bond at being the pure action hero riven by questions about the past - bond's supposed to be a SPY

seriously.. should be about living by his wits

TRANSPORTER 3!!!

i really wanted quantum of solace to be good. i'm going to have a couple drinks and pretend it is anyway when i go see it.

i'm pretty excited abt transporter 3

these days i see lowered expectations as a blessing

guyz it is still great, silly fun - go see it!

> whatever statham's character is called

The Transporter, I believe, but I'll have to check.

haha does everyone in the transporter movies really call him "the transporter"? if not they should.

QoS is 106 minutes, shortest 007 in forever.

Felt a lot longer :/

> haha does everyone in the transporter movies really call him "the transporter"? if not they should.

Sure, he's like The Lone Ranger: his friends call him "The."

Statham movies are always dumb fun.

Crank 2, guys

lol no way

I really want to see Statham star in a romantic comedy

AS long as he beats the crap out of Bill Paxton I'm okay with that.

Some bad news yesterday left me in need of some well-done escapism last night, and this hit the spot admirably. Overall it was a good deal better than I expected. I don't think Forster was neccessarily the best choice of director though, the more auterish touches (the different typefaces for different locations, the Tosca fight scene) were a bit stylistically jarring. A bond film requires an uber-competent journeyman, really.

this was well-shot and well-acted, but jeez make yr mind up are you a global conspiracy movie or a revenge drama, also why are you incomprehensible

liked the grit and the slightly more realistic than usual action scenes, but the movie didn't unfold like Casino Royale did, it felt like a load of bits rather than a cogent whole

altogether, only sporadically thrilling

also

why the fuck did that MI6 traitor dude at the start not take out Bond FIRST

i'm still psyched!!!!!!!!1

Pulling in huge worldwide numbers:

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/new-bond-160m-in-10-days-overseas/

Complete swill. Utterly incomprehensible - like so many action films at the moment, it had a plot (of sorts) but absolutely no story. No sadistic imagination of the best Bond - giant squid, carpet beater on the balls, shoes with poison knives in them, you know the sort of thing.

No gambling, no relaxing long drinks and eating. No high life.

Also, the problem with these computers that know everything and can find out anything at an instant is they take away a good deal of dramatic narrative drive - no finding out who people are, no TRYING to find out who people are and what they are doing, not with M15's massive iphone interface. See also the hilarious Eagle Eye for 'the computer that can do everything' problem; it completely takes away the need for careful and exciting writing.

Tourism brochure nonsense. Bond moved from location to location with no identifiable reason for doing so, each location with its own carefully designed font.

Ad campaign crap. Not so much the product placement, after all in a slightly warped sense, this reflects the tradition in carefully mentioning specific brand names that Bond uses to show his good but not expensive tastes, but things like long unnecessary shots of couple walking in the desert, like some sort of aftershave commercial.

Above mentioned impossible to decipher chases etc. A modern malaise - directors should not be trying to make you feel what it might be like to be involved in a car crash (sudden and impossible to comprehend massive sensory overload resulting in death) but creating some kind of cinematic sequence from the various elements - I want to be excited, not confused. Shaky camera also cheap way of avoiding problematic explanations of how exactly a chap made it from a church steeple to a moving boat via a clothes line. It just happened when you weren't looking.

See also the fights. A series of viewable crunching punches, crashing into furniture, stumbling around as you or I might, far more fun than a shaky blur followed by a chap on the floor with clothes peg up his arse.

Hilarious bit where they drive into the desert for no reason only to find a chap with a big plane for no reason who lets them have it for no reason before phoning the air force for no reason. All film like that to a certain extent.

Crap villain.

But other than that, a good time had?

Wouldn't have missed it for the world.

bond falls into hole, works out why bad guy is bad while casually escaping = moment where plot loses any remaining credibility

- bond seems weirdly passive - like a mouse in a maze - he's not demonstrably cleverer than anyone

- isn't he supposed to be a spy? a double agent? the fun of spy stories is the pretending to be someone else, and the consequences if you get found out, right in the middle of the bee's nest. the total disregard for this probably reached its apex when bond and dusky companion arrive at their swanky hotel after an airplane gun battle, a parachute drop, and several hours walking through the desert. they show up at the hotel not having even taken the time to wash their faces! actually this goes beyond spycraft - bond simply wouldn't look that disheveled, for that long. the man has principles.

This yes.
Also the villain kept reminding me of Prince Gerhardt in 30 Rock and making me laugh.
Much as I like Daniel Craig, you know that advert for FD TV or something that's on every 5 minutes - where he's trying to remain unflinching while a load of stuff is chucked at him but basically ends up looking a bit bored - well to me that seems to sum up his acting style in Bond. Maybe it's because the ad is on all the time, though.

The opera bit was fun and totally silly, they should have made more of that.

Glad I saw it, anyway.

variety review hits the nail on the head:

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117938800.html?categoryid=31&cs=1

"a cipher in his own franchise"

I think that Foster has screwed up the action sequences which is pretty unforgivable

YES

the scaffolding fight was OK, but reminded me of a Jet Li / Once Upon a Time in China scene.

Incoherent car chases = apparently, no one cares. same with the boat mayhem -- give us a wide shot plz. (I have to say things improved after maybe the worst pre-credit sequence AND opening titles art I've ever seen them do.)

also, swiping the death-by-gold-paint from Goldfinger was really cheap.

One line I cut from my review was that Bond didn't grieve this much over his wife, and that was Diana Rigg.

GamalielRatsey completely OTM. I liked it anyway.

I wish I had realized EVERY critic is calling the last one "franchise reboot" before I wrote my review. :( No more puter vocab, ever.

Better than referring to CR as "Bond Begins"

Both the Craig films have felt truer to the experience of reading Ian Fleming than any of the other movies, to me. And for that reason alone I really love them.

Craig and Dench have enough chemistry to start a meth lab. They're great together.

we saw this last night. basically everyone is on point with complaining about the dullness, lack of glamor, endless breaking glass & bone crunching noises, incomprehensible vehicle scenes, very very thin plot that barely hung together.

the plot almost seemed as if it had been swiped from a proposed video game sequel to "casino royale". bond just shuttles from spot to spot. in each spot there's either a a) gun battle b) vehicle chase or c) kung fu. in between these scenes there's super-thin exposition that's either ridiculous ("we fell from an airplane into a hole that contains the clues to figuring out quantum's plot") or incomprehensible ("we marked a stack of bills and our analysis tells us you should go to haiti").

lame.

Our Joel said as much about the shuttling from spot to spot. But I must have missed all the Bond movies where this doesn't happen?

the first third, where it's not sure what kind of movie it is (james bourne? jason bond? godfather of funk? king of soul?) is pretty drecky. After the Tosca bit, it settles into Bond, James Bond, and even though the score never gives in, it's clear we're in familiar territory, which as a fan I enjoyed immensely. A little bit obvious, a little bit underexplained in between the obvious parts, but the bad guy loses, James Bond wins and as a bonus he forgets to bone the leading lady because they both know there's more important things to do.

Everyone complaining about the plot, seriously, stop wasting your money on Bond movies, everyone wins. How the fuck is this story "thin" if you enjoyed Casino Royale (bad guy loses kabillions because a plane fails to explode! decides to hold a poker game to solve his problem! SENSIBLE. BELIEVABLE. whatever. watching bond is not tithe.)

1. How did they carry a watertight bag full of drowned girl into the hotel and then empty her so perfectly onto the bed? I mean there wasn't a drop spilt, no spatter, nothing.

2. Why was Bond thinking he could throw them off (and apparently successful) by telling the airline girl to say Cairo? Did they forget to put the thingamajig back in his arm after the last go-round? (yes I realize this is like saying how come they never brought back the autogyro from YOLT)

3. Maybe a Britisher can correct me, but I assumed that all aviators and intelligence professionals worldwide referred to the identifier on the side of an aircraft's tail as a BORT NUMBER, not a "tail number." I mean let's do this half right.

4. Best use of "amirite" in a film amirite?

5. Numbers 5 through 102 are reserved as placeholders for more specific rebuttals to complaints about "this was a bond movie I was expecting a not bond movie"

103. Jack White sucks

104. the car chase at the beginning was completely awful, you need a few wide shots holding for more than an instant so people can have a little bit of context besides "Italian for police" and "quarry" - really shitty cold opening, had me prepared for a very long evening by the end of it

105. tosca bit was too arty for my taste, I don't want to watch an opera unless 007 is watching the opera, once he leaves to go get in a fight and run around I would like to stick to the fighting and running around. Yes we understand there is still an opera being performed in the building. And now back to the fighting. Opera still going on. Fighting. Opera.

105a. ditto the horse race bullshit

105b. Actually let's get down to brass tacks here. You're going to open on a car chase with NO context whatsoever, not even the basic geometry of the situation or who's chasing what or why where how, but then every other action sequence for the rest of the first act you want to spend time on something that has absolutely nothing to do with the action, presumably to force some other kind of context down my throat. How about go fuck yourself.

106. Canadian agent saying thank you was kinda awesome, as was the CIA plane bit, even though the latter was rather clumsily telegraphed by GPS SCRAMBLER flashing on the screen. How about you just let us assume that? It's the goddamn CIA.

107. lol those are sinkholes, they're everywhere I WONDER WHAT HAPPENS NOW

108. Villain was not relaxed enough. Villains are supposed to settle down and have a drink with Bond and sit across a table and glare at each other while they trade backhanded compliments. This guy never had a chance, and that made him seem weak sauce. It's not the actor, it's the script.

109. Quantum? Seriously? I think even SMERSH was better.

110. I liked it you should see it if you haven't*

* see opening paragraph for exceptions

111. also lol american black ops dad patrol planning to catch an MI6 field operative by busting through the front door.

112. would've really really liked to see philip seymour hoffman as felix's boss. oh man that would have been awesome.

113. Mr White is really really cool and he needs to be in the next film a lot.

he is a lot less cool now that his business card reads QUANTUM across the top though

I thought he had a Yorkshire accent for a second or two but I think I was misplacing Christensen's Scandinavian vowel sounds.

Quantum is kinda meh. Better than SPECTRE, worser than SMERSH.

how the hell is quantum better than spectre?!?!?

you're crazy

SPECTRE makes me think of Casper the Friendly Bastard Ghost for some reason.

villain's pansy screaming in the final showdown was unintentionally hilarious. it was also annoying that bond james bond appeared to be having difficulty fighting the guy, fiery hotel notwithstanding. i mean c'mon dude you kill ppl for a living, this guy is a pussy

i thought it was merely okay, glad i caught the matinee. gonna watch CR tonight to make me feel better

everyone who said "videogame sequel" is otm.

yeah guys can we just stop saying "action movie" and say "videogame sequel" instead because y'know videogames make more money

manchurian candidate, the original first person shooter

112. would've really really liked to see philip seymour hoffman as felix's boss. oh man that would have been awesome.

it seemed reeeally obvious that they just wodged hoffman's character from charlie wilson's war into the movie wholesale. i speculated to pete afterwards that maybe they wanted hoffman and couldn't get him.

greatest moment of the movie was amalric pointing his henchman's gun for him as the hotel exploded around them. it's not the kind of thing that gets written into a script. there were too few such moments - craig and amalric warily flirting with each other over a scotch would have offered a whole tapestry of these.

yeah exactly. that scene belongs in every bond movie and leaving it out lets down both bond and whomever his adversary is (ditto the girls - although olga turned this mother out just by walking from one place to another afaic)

yeah, my lord.

isn't there also supposed to be at least a little back-and-forthing between bond and the sexpot du jour who has turned up to personally tell him to go home (and who then doesn't seem to mind when he doesn't)? like "you sure you're not working for the other side?" "i can work whichever side you like" but he just picks her up like a piece of costume jewelry.

i mean i know bond is supposed to be all cold and sharky man after the loss of his dear vesper but for that reason it seems weird not to sniff out the situation a little. which brings up an important question - what is bond's system for not getting killed/bugged by potential honeypots? he waits until she falls asleep, then ties a string from her toe to his, thus waking him as soon as she's up?

I kinda knew haggis would make a hash of the whole thing, tbh. I went in with lower expectations and was quite happy with what I got, which (I think) was a decent bond film, which is (to a slobbering box set bond whore, natch) a good time at the movies. It probably is a two, two and a half star flick, but there's something to be said for a franchise that spans four/five decades and maintains even that level of consistent quality (e.g., daniel craig).

also the preview where clive owen takes on the big nasty bank? that shit looks terrible.

eh, don't complain, we got previews for "2012", where sea level magically flows downhill into the himalayas, and "seven pounds", which was the worst trailer i've ever seen in my life. and "the spirit" and "fast and the furious" which make me sad for the future.

"day the earth stood" still looked great, though.

"are you sitting in a chair?"
"yes"
"are you ... human?"
"i am ... keanu"

also tombot how dare you question my devotion to sparkle motion, you're not the only person on thread with a box set.

of course every action movie is just exposition scenes between action scenes, just like every horror movie is exposition scenes between gory scenes, every drama is exposition scenes between scenes of people screaming at each other, every porno is just exposition scenes between sex scenes.

i just felt that the exposition scenes were weak, rushed and incomprehensible. i mean, so were the action scenes, but like a lot of other people said on thread, the genius of bond isn't in the action scenes (well, except maybe in those sean connery ones where he ski jumps through alpine hotels and jumps speedboats over sheriff's cars) but rather in the humor and high style of the exposition. which was just missing here, for the most part.

and this is a minor quibble but i think bond looks a lot cooler and works a lot better when he's running around the "old world" (siena, lake como, the mediterranean, places like haiti and africa) than when he's scouting out potential locations for wallpaper* magazine photo shoots (those corny ultramodern hotels and office buildings and opera houses they spent half the movie in)

the humor and high style of the exposition. which was just missing here, for the most part.

you're right, but I think I saw more humor in the way each action scene led itself so nicely (ridiculously) into the next exposition. I thought crawling out of the underground river into the drought-afflicted village was actually pretty nice.

I think what we've learned from this is that CR set a rather extraordinarily high bar for Craig's stint in the role. This was still closer to Living Daylights than it was to the latter Brosnan models

I thought DTESS trailer looked awful regardless of unbelievably awesome casting. We had to sit through TWO trailers for Seven Pounds, which I now prsesume came about due to some unfortunate accident happening to the 2012 reel. lol analog.

The fight in the hotel in Haiti was such an obvious rip of bourne supremacy I wanted to puke btw

OOH OOH HIT HIM WITH A ROLLED UP MAGAZINE YEAH fuck yourself art fag out of his league

(nb rolled up magazine appears to be one of the few bourne props not utilized in this movie)

About two minutes in this became the first film where I moved from the second row way back into the cinema just so's I'd have a hope of actually making out what was going on.

i just watched CR. seeing it the night after QoS does not do the newest installation any favors at all.

oops lol i meant "rescreened"

ebert's review is merciless but great
he would appear to be much more the bond fan than I am, in that vulcans don't do THAT kind of way

LOL my wife just said something almost exactly like that about the star trek trailer, except it was "kirk doesn't do THAT!"

105. tosca bit was too arty for my taste, I don't want to watch an opera unless 007 is watching the opera, once he leaves to go get in a fight and run around I would like to stick to the fighting and running around. Yes we understand there is still an opera being performed in the building. And now back to the fighting. Opera still going on. Fighting. Opera.

FUCK NO THIS WAS AWESOME

I didn't like that either. How many fucking times are we going to see "violence scored with orchestral music and all sound effects removed" oooooh arty arty.

I mean we lingered on the action of the opera SO LONG and REPEATEDLY, during the exact time when the like HERO of the movie is KICKING ASS, that I genuinely expected at least one of the singers to rip off his costume and start shooting real bullets and shit, in league with the baddies. Which is exactly what would have happened in pretty much any other Bond era. As it was, the only thing I could come up with is that they were making some kind of parallel with the plot of Tosca at that moment and Greene's plan for world domination (i.e. the people in cages)? Dan do you know which part of the opera that was?

dan you just like opera, tho

thought this was pretty dope, not as good as casino royale, but better than all the brosnans i thought except maybe goldeneye

chick was banging, bond was well-dressed, they went to tons of cool places, could have used less editing in the fight scenes but whatever

weirdly enough the bond that craig reminds me of more than any of the others is dalton who i always thought was way underrated. hes like dalton in connerys body or something.

cool computer too

still though, i dont understand why no one asks me to do some script doctoring

so basically what i'm hearing from this thread is; see transporter 3 instead

someone thot Tosca scene was ripoff of G'father 3? I thot it was a ripoff of the intercut horse race 30 mins earlier!

this was NOT a "Bond film" in the ways that satisfy me, sorry.

for Craig-Amalric antidote, rewatch Munich

i actually really liked amalric. he was believably decadent, crazy and vicious. if anybody ever does a film version of huysmans books almaric would make a great protaganist (i'm thinking À rebours). too bad he didn't have a cool twist like le chiffre's bleeding eye.

i do agree it was hard to believe that he gave bond so much trouble in the fight scene at the end. maybe bond was thrown off by his girlish screaming?

well he did have an ax

oh ye Spoiler: how did Bond know which room Olga was in? He went straight there. That is of course the only plot hole in this film.

Amalric reminded me of Phil Spector...

The Ebert review is picky and I agree with much of it, but in the end I kinda liked QoS. Forster may just be the best director the Bond series has had in awhile - the non-action scenes all looked great and it seemed production design was trying to create a new visual style that would eventually be as iconic as the 60s-era Bond films were. I dug that a lot.

I hope that Shaky-Cam is on it's way out after this. It's such a dated technique now and effectively eliminates the outrageousness that make Bond movies different from Generic Action Film. Cold opening on the car chase was OK, but after a couple of minutes I was ready to shout out CAN WE GET A PANORAMA? IT'S A GODDAMN ASTON MARTIN CHASE IN ITALY! The boat chase was worse... mandatory study of the John Woo boat chase in Face/Off is in order.

Glad to know that MI6 still certifies it's agents on the DC-3.

Also, hated the Jack White song but the rest of the soundtrack was pretty great... PleasePleasePlease can they get Goldfrapp next time?

I do like that the gadgets have been banished to the Universal Exports office and that Bond goes with instincts (and fighting, drinking, shooting, and screwing) to complete a mission than solely relying on technocrats and client-server-style spying. I like the time spent on the Bond/M relationship w.r.t. this, even if much of it is Bond hanging up the phone and M exclaiming "Where the hell are you?"

This was rad.

I thought by virtue of not being stupidly long this was much better than Casino Royale. I kind of wish Greengrass would do one of these though. I think Greengrass + Craig could = Perfect Bond.

I liked this fine.

a very good time imo

I felt like this movie would have been a lot better if just about every shot in it was one second longer.

It did seem abrupt.

The title sequence (minus the Jack White/Alicia Keys song) was one of the best in recent memory, but taking liberties and switching up the fonts for the location identifiers throughout the film instead of making them uniform KILLED MY INNER DESIGNER.

That was very jarring, I agree.

And since when did Bond movies trouble us with titles identifying each location by name? If you need them to tell where Bond is, you're not paying attention very well.

In the title sequence, there was a moment when a giant sexy she-beast emerged from the sand, and it was at that moment that they flashed the title card "And Judy Dench as M".

Forster may just be the best director the Bond series has had in awhile

Really? Based on the only other film of his I've seen (Stranger Than Fiction), I'm not a fan. I found his direction too obtrusive for a Bond movie. CR was far more well directed in terms of pace, tension and visual style* IMO.

*Not that this film didn't look good, it's just that CR looked a lot more Bondy.

I thought by virtue of not being stupidly long this was much better than Casino Royale

In theory that's what I expected, except it seemed longer than CR. Even without any goddamn poker.

There were titles IDing locations in CR too, but not in fancy-ass fonts "imaged" onto the street. The best one here was "you're going to Port-au-Prince" dialogue followed by obv tropical rundown streetscape and :Port-au-Prince, Haiti" title...

also, what's with the ill-fated Agent Fields only being called "Strawberry Fields" in the credits?? I also liked Ebert's "Camille Squeal" idea.

what's with the ill-fated Agent Fields only being called "Strawberry Fields" in the credits??

there was that bit where he asked her what her first name was and she said 'Fields. just... Fields.' or something similar, in a way which was supposed to suggest 'if i tell you my first name you'll only make fun of me'. Also was not her hair strawberry blonde? The weird thing is that I noticed these two things and also sat through the credits and didn't realise her name was 'Strawberry Fields' until someone mentioned it two days later.

Do you think Craig's Bond has abandoned his not listening to the Beatles without earmuffs policy then?

but better than all the brosnans i thought

Ooooh, gladder than ever I skipped alla those.

Bond and M have become way too much like John-Boy and Mama Walton for my taste.

I saw Oona Chaplin's name in the end credits and had to IMDB for more info. Charles and Oona's granddaughter.

I think Goldeneye was better than this one, in a campy fun sort of way. This was muddled and unfocused, despite all the pretty location photography and the superior Bond.

whatever else you might say about this movie--if it had been brosnan instead of craig it probably would have been 10x as bad

well, jettisoning him went with roughening up the formula.

otoh, 007 pulling off the airport-clerk "lie for me when you get this phone call" thing is something I could see Connery or even Brosnan doing -- Craig doesn't have that kinda smoothie shit readily available.

i dunno, dude is pretty charming

"i cant seem to find the, uh, stationary. will you help me look?"

he seemed more bond-like in this than people are giving him crediot for imo

I wish the depth he was trying to give his performance here was justified by the script this time. Royale at least faked that kind of depth competently.

so in bucking a CIA-attempted coup, is this Bond "more Michael Moore than Roger Moore"?

http://www.juancole.com/2008/11/quantum-of-anti-imperialism.html

if so, at least this is Paul Haggis-infused liberalism that comes off better than Crash.

Bond killing every lead and breaking glass and blowing things up is so much better than him sitting across a table from the main villain playing texas god damn hold em for hours and hours.

completely forgettable minus the hot girl he hangs out with. and all the references to the previous movie were lost on me since I had mostly forgotten it.

switching up the fonts for the location identifiers throughout the film instead of making them uniform KILLED MY INNER DESIGNER.

"ooh, finally a chance to use my poor 3rd world countries font!"

xpost but *he* didn't really kill every lead

I mean we lingered on the action of the opera SO LONG and REPEATEDLY, during the exact time when the like HERO of the movie is KICKING ASS, that I genuinely expected at least one of the singers to rip off his costume and start shooting real bullets and shit, in league with the baddies. Which is exactly what would have happened in pretty much any other Bond era. As it was, the only thing I could come up with is that they were making some kind of parallel with the plot of Tosca at that moment and Greene's plan for world domination (i.e. the people in cages)? Dan do you know which part of the opera that was?

What's happening is that Tosca believes she has arranged a fake execution for her beloved, but finds out after the guns are fired that the execution was actually real. Shortly afterwards, a police officer comes to arrest her for killing the corrupt police chief at the end of Act II. Distraught, she throws herself off of a building rather than submitting to the authorities who just killed the man she loves.

The logistical plot symmetries here revolve around the gunfire of the firefight between Bond and the Quantum members being masked by the gunfire onstage of the execution. The thematic symmetries revolve around Bond essentially carrying out an execution on the Quantum agents, followed by him tossing the British agent off the roof at the same time Tosca is hurling herself to her death.

I forgot that Forster's Kite Runner adap (which I haven't seen but got muserable reviews) had the usual ayatollahs calling for his head.

did we really need subtitles to the annoying cab driver?

I kinda found Giancarlo Giannini ending up in a Dumpster with his career apt.

Dan you rule

yes they are foreshadowing

xpost about subtitles

did we really need subtitles to the annoying cab driver?

― bnw, Monday, November 17, 2008 1:06 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i thot this was sort of funny and clever

I liked that too!

I just want to mention my favorite shot, which came during Bond's patio aperatif with Giancarlo Giannini. Apropos of exactly zilch we cut jarringly to an extreme low-angle of their conversation that just happens to frame the exquisite stems of Giannini's wife/girlfriend sunning herself in the foreground - I expect her to move, or say something, but no, after a couple of seconds we just cut right back to Bond's conversation

they know their audience Tracer Hand

I liked Bond using Mathis, his buddy, as a human shield when the Italian cops fired on him. Hardcore, DAAAAMNNN.

Yeah that was kind of uhhh.

they werent italian they were bolivian

I liked Bond using Mathis, his buddy, as a human shield when the Italian cops fired on him. Hardcore, DAAAAMNNN.

Total Recall did it first!

Fun, but underwhelming. Almaric should play Roman Polansky.

they werent italian they were bolivian

Yeah my bad...typical Bond globetrotting, got me confused.

Fun, but underwhelming. Almaric should play Roman Polansky.

Seriously! Looks just like him!

damn rock u shoulda been paying attention to the crazy font titles sayin where we were

I didn't mind the location titles.

And the title sequence was far better than CR - much closer in mood to the early Binder titles.

Yeah I loved the titles - woozy and nauseous and 70s >>>> Flash animation

agree about the opening title sequence. made CRs look double-bad. but the changing location font was so stupid and irritating

They should have used a distressed typewriter font with teletype sfx, amirite?

I think the CR opening credits are really exciting! But that's a lot to do with context and having a much better song under them.

The theme song to this one was almost exactly like a bag of vomit.

xpost

Yeah, I don't know why so many other reviews I've read complain about the main title animation. I thought they were excellent, and a definite throwback to the early Binder titles. The dancing silhouettes and animated dots were a nice ref to Dr. No.

i remember violently hating the CR title sequence, this one's seemed quite... okay? Except for that loving lingering on the bullet in mid-air business which just seemed either a) too Matrix or b) too CSI or c) for some other reason super lame.

the moment jack black started singing on the theme song it was... crazy bathos. everything about those opening lyrics was wrong for a bond theme.

I really enjoyed the film though! my standards aren't too high, i guess, also I'm quite good at making up stories to fill in plot gaps on the fly so I never get out of a film wondering what just happened there because i've got some kind of whole-cloth explanation out of my head. I loved the Tosca sequence, although did spend quite a bit of it convinced he was going to end up on stage by mistake and the whole thing turn into crazed situation comedy. But it did feel a lot longer than it was - at some point I remember looking at my watch and thinking 'isn't this supposed to be an hour and a half?', you didn't have a feeling of the narrative, of tension rising until there's a climactic showdown, instead it was "and now they are going to a new location where there will be a fight and some kind of tense conversation," "and now a new location where etc etc", "and now a new location oh shit wait this is the final set-piece and there is FIRE".

I really, really like the fact that this movie is more grounded in plausibility than other entries in the Bond canon. I like wacky spy gadgets as much as the next moviegoer but it really felt like stripping away all of those trappings and boiling things down to a gritty-cartoon take on international espionage as opposed to a dayglosilly-cartoon take on international espionage made the menace more meaningful to me.

It's the difference between Tim Burton's Batman and Christopher Nolan's, really; I like both a lot but they satisfy drastically different entertainment centers.

so in bucking a CIA-attempted coup, is this Bond "more Michael Moore than Roger Moore"?

I'm not clicking that link unless somebody pays me first, but if that's what it actually says, then the person writing it must be watching their second 007 film

I think if you are gonna go for grit you need an intelligible plot and some plausibility.

I don't see how the plot was unintelligible and an organization buying up a bunch of useless land in arid markets so that they can control the water supply to blackmail the governments into giving them $$$ seems like something that is happening right now.

lol at the idea that intelligence services & their agents going rogue and disobeying directives from their governments is "michael moore"

that part of the plot was clear; i was more confused about how the different characters all connected together. so how did they get from the dude who shot M to the guy who got killed right away in haiti? the dude was giving money to charity - why, again? how come the bond girl was driving around outside waiting for someone to come out with the briefcase? who exactly did she think he was? what did bond walk in on there? how come he just let her go? etc etc i really couldn't follow the logic of any of the middle section very well.

actually Tom he does, but perhaps more OTM calls QoS "Graham Greene on steroids" rather than Ian Fleming.

also on Obama appointmt thread re his kissing rings'efficiently', you sound like the Foreign Secretary harrumphing to M!

max, in terms of a $225 million-budget superspy fantasy written by Paul Haggis, it's not a bad shorthand -- read what the guy has to say about Moonraker and the late '70s

ie, how often has US/UK policy in a Bond plot been presented as this amoral? Never that I can remember.

(tho of course relatively good politics doesn't stop it from being an utterly mediocre entertainment)

i was more confused about how the different characters all connected together. so how did they get from the dude who shot M to the guy who got killed right away in haiti? the dude was giving money to charity - why, again? how come the bond girl was driving around outside waiting for someone to come out with the briefcase? who exactly did she think he was? what did bond walk in on there? how come he just let her go?

They were following the chain of associations:

- M's bodyguard was an agent working for Quantum despite having been assigned to her for years and having passed a rigorous background check.
- He was in possession of a sequential series of marked bills, too many for it to be shrugged off as a coincidence.
- The remainder of the bills were funneled through Greene's "charity" organization, which we later find out is a shadowy front to launder Quantum's money.
- (this is the bit I don't remember; there was some connection between this charity and the alleged geologist meeting with Greene that I remember nodding at in the movie but I can't recall now)
- Said "geologist was actually an assassin and the meeting was set up by Ms. Lovely, who was actually trying to get dirt on Greene so she could use him to put her in front of the general, who had killed her family.

I don't see how the plot was unintelligible and an organization buying up a bunch of useless land in arid markets so that they can control the water supply to blackmail the governments into giving them $$$ seems like something that is happening right now.

T. Boone Pickens to thread!

The politics of water in Bolivia (The Nation, 2005):

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050214/shultz

I don't see how the plot was unintelligible and an organization buying up a bunch of useless land in arid markets so that they can control the water supply to blackmail the governments into giving them $$$ seems like something that is happening right now.

There's a lot of movie plots you could make sound realistic if you avoid the details.

I think the onus is on you to point out the details that make this movie so beyond the pale in terms of making sense for a Bond movie

I'm not sure about 'making sense', but the plot was be a lot more hastily sketched than in most of the top tier Bond films.

I really hope you are not including the Roger Moore era there.

I said 'top tier'.

Uh??? I'm pretty sure watching this movie qualified me to be a secret agent... that's kinda the whole point of these films.

It doesn't allow itself to be a Bond movie half the time was my problem.

I will let it go though b/c when I enjoy a movie I usually avoid ilx threads about it at all costs b/c some dick like me is on there doing this.

If the plot isn't totally realistic then where is the training value? i mean come on...

James Bond and the Leaked Dossier.

i liked this one okay but i found it way less engaging than CR + the action/chase scenes were awfully shot

the construction site -> embassy scene in casino royale > this whole movie

but then with the poker...

Anyway, missteps made in the film are probably more evident in areas where the director/writer assumed too much knowledge on the part of the audience, like the whole intercutting between the gunfight and "Tosca" where not knowing what's happening in the opera removes a significant amount of impact from the scene.

I am also getting sick of shakycam but not so much so that I disliked the movie.

but then with the poker...

― Kerm, Monday, November 17, 2008 3:12 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark

i didn't mind this because it made the action scenes seem much more important instead of like something that just happens to bond every day

otoh i thought that CR lulled too much and that QoS didn't lull enough so :/

also i kind of wish this one was more glamorous-- the scene at the italian villa is one of the most memorable and it's also the most CR-ish

the poker stuff in CR was pretty good imo, especially with everyone being cordial around the table and every time bond steps out of the room someone tries to kill him

^^^^ YES

Where was the cold open shot, btw? That tunnel/highway at the water's edge and on the side of a mountain was a cool locale.

I liked the poker scenes in CR except for the very end when they were pushing the board cards around and mixing them up with Le Schiffre's hole cards and then Bond's hole cards to show their best hands. Not realistic, but that's just me having watched too much televised poker.

And of course there was all the usual nonsense of hands lower than a full house not seeming to ever come up. But yeah, the poker was good, and served as a way to build dramatic tension other than action scenes, which helped the pacing.

yep i liked it. not quite as much as casino royale, for reasons others have stated better than i can...could have used a little more breathing room between action scenes and a bit more classic bond flavor...but that said if the idea was to make "the bond identity" job well done. and i love the bourne movies so i was cool w/it.

^^^ also agree w/ this

Where was the cold open shot, btw? That tunnel/highway at the water's edge and on the side of a mountain was a cool locale.

― Johnny Fever, Monday, November 17, 2008 3:30 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark

when they approached the road the fake water/mountain looked exactly like the fake water/mountain approach in austin powers 2 when we first see dr. evil's island

yeah this movie was way bourne!! but not as good imo

and circle back to Ebert's BOND IS NOT AN ACTION HERO

rong

The fact that they used Texas Hold Em as the card game of choice in Casino Royale made me furious.

They set it in the present day, not 1962. What game would you have preferred?

I think my main beef with Ebert is that I really love the books, and I've never loved the films until CR, so all his insistence that the current bond is the wrong bond just pisses me off? plus the turn of phrase of 'peel camille' makes me want to throw vitriol in his face.
Obviously the books aren't 'action hero' books like, say, len deighton novels. Their strength is describing certain things in loving, obsessive detail: Bond's clothes, a single scene as it presents itself to his first glance, these weird semi-sexual relationships that his men have with e.g. machines or their daily ritual or their chosen future means of death. Occasionally action sequences get the same treatment, but more usually it'll be some little incident, like... um (spoilers!!) whichever one where he's been in that health-camp and kills the dude in the sauna machine and his glee is so delicately perfectly drawn - that gets the really interesting writing. So the Craig Bonds aren't the Fleming Bonds, for me at least. But they're closer to the Bond I like than the films before, they've got that sort of dead-eyed weirdness that's so fascinating in the books. And certainly they're better off without that sniggering wackiness that Ebert so sorely misses: in order to emphasise that the Austin Powers stuff was the real heart of Bond that's missing now he's had to ignore all the funny bits in QoS and all the action in the old Bonds. I dunno: I do think that QoS is kind of missing the glee in detail that I like in the books, but... that's not what Ebert seems to be pining for.

i kind of think i like QoS better than the first bourne film? but it's wayyyy not as good as the second or third bournes.

xpost yes the texas hold em thing really pissed me off because the Fleming description of chemin de fer was one of those glee-in-detail things I like best about the books.

- He was in possession of a sequential series of marked bills, too many for it to be shrugged off as a coincidence.

this is such a boner move for a guy that has managed to keep his true identity and employer secret for eight years.

i thought he only had one bill from that sequential set? and they were all 'that's a bit thin' and then the dude with the touchscreen was like 'yeah but there's a whole run of them in haiti' and off Bond went.

ohhhhhhhhh. right, yeah.

anyway, whoever said that an admixture of CR and QoS would produce a movie with the right amount of glam action and lulls (and maybe lulz) was correct.

i have no desire to return to camp bond, but i'm kinda with morbs; he's not supposed to be a bourne-style action hero.

i liked how much of a shitbird the white CIA guy was

haha but he was almost too ron burgandy

http://www.collider.com/uploads/imageGallery/Charlie_Wilsons_War/charlie_wilson_s_war_movie_image_philip_seymour_hoffman.jpg
http://www.felixleiter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/beam-leiter.jpg

i love that they brought back the other CIA dude from the poker game in casino royale (felix i think his name is)...anyway that CIA agent is a real cool bro to bond.

action was disorientating and confusing as per usual complaints about movies that are made and there were a lot of plot jumps that seemed incomplete or unexplained or just not good

the worst thing was the location titles though - weird and crap

the opening titles and song were rubbish too but not quite as rubbish as casino royale but really rubbish

felix leiter is an old bond character

Felix leiter, he's the CIA guy from all the bond flicks

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c8/OfficialFelixLeiters.jpg

http://www.patrickmoberg.com/november-4-2008.jpg

huh i never knew that was a bond recurring character

lol xpost

Where was the cold open shot, btw? That tunnel/highway at the water's edge and on the side of a mountain was a cool locale.

Lake Garda in Italy.

felix fucken OWNES, my dude jeffrey should team up with bond in the next movie

The fight in the hotel in Haiti was such an obvious rip of bourne supremacy I wanted to puke btw

― TOMBOT, Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:54 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark

ya u could really tell the 2nd unit dude did the last coupla bournes

111. also lol american black ops dad patrol planning to catch an MI6 field operative by busting through the front door.

― TOMBOT, Saturday, November 15, 2008 5:39 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark

^^i hated this, cuz it's like they were swiping all the wrong things from the bourne movies. the scene basically just ends with him hitting a few dudes and then waltzing out the back door, cut to next scene. maybe my alltime favorite sequence from the bourne movies is in the second one, where the gsg9 or whatever is storming the hotel in berlin - in a normal action movie (ie QoS) they make it a survivable situation for the hero by limiting the competence of the bad guys and by making the protagonist invulnerable. when bourne evades the swat team and sneaks out of the hotel, the sequence isn't over because the police are capable of reacting to his actions, and it becomes an actual cat and mouse chase where bourne has to continually be alert and use lateral thinking, not just use one slick move and leave the keystone cops tripping over themselves. it's not what i would call 'realistic' but it takes an idea (super resourceful badass is being chased by large number of armed, coordinated, trained badasses) and follows it to its logical conclusion, and as a viewer you appreciate the attention to detail. there's a lot of things i dont want to see the bond movies borrow from the bourne shits - shaky cam, humorlessness, moby - but i think it sets a pretty good example as far as how to do the badass spy stuff; less invulnerable action hero and more of the resourceful, skilled secret agent who thinks on his feet.

also, it was kinda lame that they brought up the angle with the foreign minister bein all like WELL WE WOULDNT DO MUCH BUSINESS IF WE DIDNT DEAL WITH VILLAINS all makin u think some 'forget about it jake it's chinatown' shit is coming up for bond, but then he figures out bad dude just wants to control WATER so it's ok to kill him, no conflicting interests

Did people used to complain about the plots in Bond films not holding up to some kind of supposed standard of professional development in licenced-to-kill special agents and their sundry nemeses? It seems like every review and reaction contains at least one case of Double-Os Don't Do THAAAT! or Nu-SMERSH Wouldn't Do THAAAAT! and I'm just like ok I understand that there are some folks who may want to pretend everything besides FRWL didn't actually get made and go on to soak the world for hundreds of millions of dollars, I guess, but guess what, secret agents and international organized criminal outfits don't do ANY OF THIS STUFF, so can we settle down with what is and is not part of the Standard Operating Procedures and Best Practices for Mystery Secret Adventure People?

JEEE-ZUSS.

And yeah it may be just that everybody is making these comments in the tongue-in-cheek "explosions in space" vein that I was trying to go for upthread and I just can't read between the lines because I'm tired

speaking of explosions in space wtf at the end of moonraker, amirite

the tunnel by Lake Garda was also used as a location in DANGER DIABOLIK

so we got to see the trailer for the next Fast & Furious movie before this, in which Diesel et al. steal 3/4ths of a multitrailer gasoline tanker which is carrying "$1.4 million" in black gold or whatever. lol obsolescence: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/11/somali-pirates.html

felix leiter is an old bond character

and Wright isn't even the first black actor to play him: Bernie Casey in Never Say Never Again

The villain in Moonraker played Amalric's father in Munich. Ta da!

michael lonsdale! the only actor to appear in a bond film and a jacques rivette film (i'm guessing)

yeah, I don't remember Bulle Ogier being a Bond girl

I'm surprised there's nothing yet about the gratuitous upskirt shot near the end, which was the talk of the cinema at my showing. Was it edited out of the US release?

(I didn't see it myself but was assured that it happened)

(Not by Pete)

No it was definitely there.

This is the sort of thing that makes people buy Blu-Ray players, isn't it.

cf Bill Hicks on Basic Instinct

That upskirt shot was probably the most human moment of the movie for me. That actress really put across totally fucking scared and the full-on vulnerability of that instant as she bolted for the door was great.

also WOO UPSKIRT SHOT

This movie was really good. I can't wait for the third one, where Bond emerges from his thuggish chrysalis and becomes the super badass he's supposed to be.

And I think...although future viewings on the blu-ray will have to confirm...that Olga was wearing skin-toned undies during said upskirt. I could be wrong. Will have to compare to Hitman to confirm.

you fellers are Seth Rogen

I would LOVE to be Seth Rogen. He gets paid very well to act like a pot smoking slacker.

*raises hand*

Meantime, Roger Moore on his new memoir.

(Hope to see Quantum tomorrow.)

I just got a free screener copy of this. haven't decided if I will waste time watching it yet.

keep us posted tho

"act like" a pot smoking slacker

how about in Craig III, Bond actually pretends to be someone else for more than 30 seconds and has no personal stake in the goings-on except for maybe a good screw?

Saw it, really enjoyed it, definitely not perfect but hell I had a great time. More mumbling later, but I'm essentially with Tombot/Elvis T./Dan on this one.

Almaric should play Roman Polansky.

THAT'S who he was reminding me of. It was driving me crazy!

Seeing Tim Pigott-Smith as an old high government mandarin was kinda 'whoa' if only because I so vividly remember him as the asshole sadist officer The Jewel in the Crown.

how about in Craig III, Bond actually pretends to be someone else for more than 30 seconds and has no personal stake in the goings-on except for maybe a good screw?

― Dr Morbius, Friday, November 21, 2008 2:35 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

real talk

A typically overlong post from me here.

1. Although the theme song lacked any melody whatsoever, it definitely got my attention. It's been so long since a Bond theme really mattered that I had forgotten who is was this time and was quite surprised to see it was Jack White (who has never done anything I've liked) and Alicia Keys (who I adore).

2. At points I had the same reaction to this as I did to throughout Wanted, i.e. the action scenes were so fast, that I really couldn't even follow them, which sort of defeats the point, doesn't it? Ah blur of action involving main character. Cool. I guess. ?!?

3. Years ago I read a review/preview, which offered the opinion that the only way to revive the Bond franchise was to set it back in its original time frame. I still think that's true. Although I liked this, honestly there was very little uniquely Bond about it, unless the essence of Bond is just a British intelligence officer with a somewhat tense relationship with his boss. This script could've been about someone named Tony Cameron, and no one would have thought it should be a Bond movie.

4. Nothing against Craig or Judi Dench.

Although the theme song lacked any melody whatsoever, it definitely got my attention.

I admit I liked the opening guitar part. Beyond that, eh.

Point 3 is what bothered me most. It was a post-Bourne Bond, no doubt about it, not enough wisecracks or silly gizmos. They need to bring back Q and Moneypenny. I don't want invisible cars or wall-to-wall gags, but this brooding intensity and seriousness is too much the other way from Brosnan.

Jesus fucking Christ people, move the camera back a bit and hold the shot a little longer than 1/4 of a second. It's not rocket science!

(All respect due to those who do a good job and make it look easy. Rocket science or no, I'm sure it's not as easy as the guys who make it look easy make it look.)

Man, I'm all for the no-Q/Moneypenny/broad humor version of Bond at this point. The best 'James Bond' film in that vein in recent years might be, I dunno, Iron Man or something.

Meantime, the antithesis of the shaky-cam/Bourne-style action sequence was probably the tanker-top running martial arts chase/fight in You Only Live Twice -- one long swooping shot.

And it's an awesome shot, BTW. The score is great too—something else action sequences have been missing lately.

007: Man of the Left

http://blogs.citypages.com/pscholtes/2008/11/007_man_of_the.php

Probably a mix of familiar and unfamiliar takes in there, but still of interest even if you hated this... I obv did not.

Craig as Bond isn't funny often, but when he is it's usually some deadpan line from out of nowhere that I think is hysterical, so I don't really mind that aspect. it'd be nice if the next movie is slightly more 'classic' Bond but they've got a good thing going here, they shouldn't (and won't) swing too hard in the opposite direction.

good article pete

it'd be nice if the next movie is slightly more 'classic' Bond but they've got a good thing going here, they shouldn't (and won't) swing too hard in the opposite direction.

yeah i agree. i really like craig and don't need more wink-wink brosnan/moore-type antics.

more gadgets would be nice though

woop woop i liked this movie!

hmmm yes interesting tension between what the script puts way out in the open (politics basically) and what it chooses to hide in plain sight (bond stuff: the girl's name lol strawberry, his drink, the nasty shout-out to goldfinger, the several shots of the scar on camille's back)

did we need an upskirt shot of a girl who had just been sexually assaulted? seriously?

the song was just awful.

this was awful. I cannot fathom why anyone takes this franchise seriously. Each installment is more like an autistic repetition of visual tics combined with updated product placement than anything resembling an actual film. There are no characters. There are no stories. There is no reason to care about anything that happens to anybody. There is an endless parade of interchangeable villains, chase scene locales, and consumer fetish objects, framed by the bare minimum of required exposition.

hey shakey actually there were characters one of them was named james bond there was also an older gentleman maybe you saw something different?

Great imitation of Morbs on the election, Shakey, but what about your own thoughts?

Bond is more like a remarkably thin and transparent idealization of British imperial power and male sexuality than an actual character.

x-post

Yes, that's vastly different from the other Bond movies.

well exactly, that's why I always find myself so bored by them, they're all the same! Ooh look I never age and I can't die and my only defining characteristics are what products I endorse

quantum of challops

he has sex with lots of different women tho

I kind of want to see your requirements for "an actual film" described in terms of something other than "has a story and characters" since these movies (particularly the two most recent ones) have both in spades and you apparently can't recognize them.

Shouldn't Maggie Simpson be in school by now?

quantum of solace 8: "for better or for worse"

since these movies (particularly the two most recent ones) have both in spades

I didn't see the previous one but I just disagree that there was much of anything by way of characters or story here. All the central roles in the film are paper-thin caricatures that are endlessly recycled by the Bond franchise (the renegade spy, the asshole villain, the boorish American, the doomed woman, etc.) and leave little to no room for development, nuance, emotional range, or any semblance of real humanity. The story is basically the same story in every Bond film - evil bad guy has elaborate plan to do something bad, Bond "breaks the rules" to stop him, there are a bunch of chase scenes, the end. This qualifies as a "story" in only the most basic sense of the term, and is certainly not an interesting one.

damn dude i'm gonna have to reevaluate this whole thing

The story is basically the same story in every Bond film - evil bad guy has elaborate plan to do something bad, Bond "breaks the rules" to stop him, there are a bunch of chase scenes, the end. This qualifies as a "story" in only the most basic sense of the term, and is certainly not an interesting one.

*smh*

I guess its too much to ask for someone to actually explain why they like this crap. keep those zings comin y'all

Because challenging the rules in pursuit of a higher goal is the best story ever.

bro--seriously--you are being corny

― Shakey Cha Loppier

A+

Shakey is essentially right, except about Casino Royale.

And From Russia With Love.

it's a myth. the details change, but the core pillars stay the same. how the details change year to year becomes more interesting as a meta-story than the stock tropes, but those still have to be carried off well in each picture.

there you have it, shakey mo collier.

Most movies of a particular genre have essentially the same plot. Devil's in the details. (Not that I'm blanket defending all Bond movies, a bunch of them are pretty weak. But it's not the strongest argument against them)

I don't think the word "character" means what you think it means.

What I like about James Bond movies:

1. I like the action sequences. They are generally inventive and exciting, and even when they aren't I find them to be satisfying.

2. I like the hot women. They are invariably very hot and some of them are also good actresses.

3. I like the convoluted spy stories. I like the double-and triple-crosses, the quests for vengeance, the mental and physical maneuvering and manipluation happening on both sides.

4. I like the toys. I like the awesome cars, I like the spy gadgets, I like the sweet-ass phones, I like the goofy everyday-thing-that-is-now-a-lethal-weapon aspect running through every incarnation of these movies.

it's a myth. the details change, but the core pillars stay the same. how the details change year to year becomes more interesting as a meta-story than the stock tropes, but those still have to be carried off well in each picture

Shakey is telling us that these things are never carried off well in the Bond series.

shakey is not the king of stories and just because "good guy tries to defeat villain w/ plan, succeeds" isnt good enough for him (despite being good enough for literally billions of people for thousands of years), hes going to have to deal w/ it

the mental and physical maneuvering and manipluation happening on both sides.

I'm having trouble picturing Roger Moore's Bond even knowing how to spell "mental."

Shakey is telling us that these things are never carried off well in the Bond series.

no hes not--hes saying that "good guy defeats bad guy" isnt an interesting story, to which i can only be like... shakin my damn head

^^^thx goole for at least a serious answer. Maybe I'd be more engaged if the myth changed a bit more dramatically from picture to picture, or if there was a bit more self-awareness built into each installment. Maybe this is why I ended up preferring Jerry Cornelius (a Bond parody) to Bond - Moorcock went all over the place with JC, focusing on his function as a myth figure as the central conceit and then letting him run wild through a bazillion different configurations of the same scenario... Bond just seems to "same same" to me whenever I dip back in and pay attention (I think the last Bond movie I saw was the one with Michelle Yeoh and Jonathon Price? I don't remember what that was called)

Maybe I'd be more engaged if the myth changed a bit more dramatically from picture to picture, or if there was a bit more self-awareness built into each installment.

Yeah, you should see "Casino Royale" and compare it to "Quantum of Solace" so that you don't come across like someone who is completely talking out of his ass.

no hes not--hes saying that "good guy defeats bad guy" isnt an interesting story, to which i can only be like... shakin my damn head

That's not what he's saying.

didn't see the previous one but I just disagree that there was much of anything by way of characters or story here. All the central roles in the film are paper-thin caricatures that are endlessly recycled by the Bond franchise (the renegade spy, the asshole villain, the boorish American, the doomed woman, etc.) and leave little to no room for development, nuance, emotional range, or any semblance of real humanity. The story is basically the same story in every Bond film - evil bad guy has elaborate plan to do something bad, Bond "breaks the rules" to stop him, there are a bunch of chase scenes, the end. This qualifies as a "story" in only the most basic sense of the term, and is certainly not an interesting one.

I'm inclined to agree with him: most Bond movies are terrible, and never held any appeal whatsoever. But I liked Star Wars and "Transformers" cartoons, so what do I know.

or if there was a bit more self-awareness built into each installment.

the last two are hugely self-aware, but it comes through in self-negation. it's very showy about which parts of the bond myth it's skewering or tossing aside.

The tone of the most recent two are so vastly different from the preceding movies that I don't really think it makes sense to compare them all as a body of work unless you are doing a contrast, a la Burton's "Batman" vs Nolan's "Batman".

it is really fxxin corny to come into a thread all blustery with some "oh man this movie sucked" shit only to reveal a) you didnt see the movies immediate predecessor which contains key plot points and b) you dislike the entire franchise to the point where you are making an active attempt to just "not get it"

WE ARE PLENTY SELF-AWARE

http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/dvd/aplus/007/600/bond4-l.jpg

Maybe I'd be more engaged if the myth changed a bit more dramatically from picture to picture, or if there was a bit more self-awareness built into each installment.

^^but the last 2 have had the most film-to-film carry overs and story arc in bond history!

the most whoa-awzom piece of tech was... a table

b) you dislike the entire franchise to the point where you are making an active attempt to just "not get it"

hey now - I have made a conscious effort to engage and understand and yes even "like" Bond ever since I was a teenager, and this is just my latest attempt. I have seen a lot of Bond movies, but I have not seen them all, and its endurance is a curiosity to me.

dude when u are complaining that all the movies are the same and have the same plot--you are making an active attempt to not get it

shakey u should watch die another day like i did this weekend! that would give you plenty of ammo, yikes that movie was bad

I freely admit this is a bad movie to jump in on; the one thing it does really wrong is that it relies HEAVILY on the assumption that the viewer has seen the previous film and many of its payoffs are tied up in that. Bond's moroseness is a direct result of the events of "Casino Royale"; throughout that movie, there's a much stronger sense of joviality in Bond's portrayal even though the magic gadget aspects had been removed and it isn't until the climax that he really goes dark and moody, which hangs over into this film until after the final confrontation.

and ftr I did register several of the key differences between this and previous Bond movies - the lack of Q/Moneypenney, an unusual humorlessness to the proceedings, a noted absence of gadgetry. Whether that's the same level of contrast as Burton and Nolan's Batman movies eh, I think that's kinda pushing it... on one level the essential Bond premise is so silly and transparently Freudian that I think I would enjoy it more (and have enjoyed it more, a la Goldfinger) when it got campy and ironic. Taking it seriously seems a bit problematic (ooh violent white male imperialist saving the planet again! good on ye!). Maybe the better Batman analogy is between the 60s TV show and Nolan and we just leave Burton out of it...

x-posts

Great imitation of Morbs on the election, Shakey

hmmm? I can certainly understand why the new slick hero of the election franchise is taken seriously. O is much more spylike than Craig's Bond too.

(See "Secretary Hillary? Oh no, not bullshit at all")

dude when u are complaining that all the movies are the same and have the same plot--you are making an active attempt to not get it

if they're all gonna have the same plot then the characters and window-dressing should be really over-the-top engaging and just stridently different from film to film otherwise I'm all "*yawn* seen this one". For example, every episode of the Prisoner is basically the same, but the reason so many of them are great is because the permutations get really inventive.

whereas the permutations with Bond usually boil down to "in this movie I wear THIS type of watch instead of THAT type of watch"

FWIW, Quantum were the ones making the imperialist moves (ie, manipulating events in local governments to give them access to key resources so they could make $$$), not Bond.

oh come on he was still interfering in a foreign country's internal affairs - whether or not it was the right thing to do is beside the point, its still a wishful projection of imperial power, something Dubya would love ("I gotta do the right thing, he's an EVIL dictator!")

no

he was not interfering in a foreign country internal affairs

did you watch the movie?

he was preventing a shadowy extragovernmental organization from interfering with a foreign countrys internal affairs

was it me or did you miss the part where the shadowy extragovernmental organization was dealing with said country's government (I don't even remember what hapless S. American gov't it was lolz)

it was you

let's plz do everything in our power to not encourage morbzy to start talking politics in a thread that is about a bond movie and why ppl do or do not like it

xposts

I didn't say it was the country's legitimate government or anything, but yes I got that they were engineering a coup to get their exclusive hands on their resources.

ok.

it was bolivia, and there were deals struck between quantum, the bolivian nat'l PD, the CIA, and sort of England. Bond was explicitly told NOT to do spy stuff but he went and did it anyway because he is a loose cannon and will not be constrained by wussy rules

xp

so the imperialist part was when bond took down the extragovernmental actors acting in violation of intl law while a bolivian secret service agent took out the corrupt general attempting to overthrow the democratically elected president of bolivia? im still not sure which is the part where bond interfered in the affairs of any government other than englands and the us.

SHE was directly interfering with another country's internal affairs in her attempts to assassinate the general. Bond didn't give two shits about the leadership of Bolivia and tracked them only as a means to get to Quantum. Furthermore, he was going after them not because of any particular interest in the goings-on in bolivia, but because of interests they had in manipulationg access and information in the UK (ie, more spillover from the previous movie).

He was violent and white tho.

the imperialist part was that the ppl of bolivia even NEEDED Bond in the FIRST PLACE. like, that he had to come in and solve their problems....at least i think that's what it is???

^^^YES thank you

when what he really NEEDED to do was BONE Olga Kurlyenko XD

she wasnt interfering with ANOTHER countrys internal affairs she was interfering with her own countrys internal affairs

THEY DIDNT NEED BOND THE BOLIVIAN CHICK DID ALL THE WORK ANYWAY JESUS

i will interfere with her internal affairs anyday

he also figured out that the UK/US were being suckered over nonexistent oil when quantum was trying to (and basically did) bottle up all the country's water.

the dude basically saved the day is how i break it down to an extent.

Srsly, the gigantic thing you're missing here is that she was doing her own thing that was focused on the Bolivian side of things and he was doing his own thing that focused on the Quantum side of things; she didn't actually need him to solve anything and the only things he really did as far as that was concerned was save her from getting killed in situations where her mission objective would have been or had been already achieved. You're basically taking the fact that this thing went down in a country of brownish ppl who don't have English as their primary language as an excuse to not pay attention to what actually happened in the movie.

i think he is using it as an excuse to challenge our preconceived notions about what's *really* happenin in bond movies

the bad guy had both of his eyes in this movie!!!!

this movie was pretty bad, sometimes it looked like a fucking Zales commercial

Needed more redhead.

I got a kick out the use of the hydrogen fuel cell action. First everything blows up, then a little later we have a Ford SUV with "HYDROGEN" across the front of its hood.

Most of the action scenes were too hyperkinetic, especially when he shift gears and we needed like 5 different cuts to see one action being performed.

The CGI shit was REALLY bad. CGI should be used in a bond flick to hide the wires, nothing more.

Was most amused by the lack of your standard stronger-and-thus-more-inhuman-than-bond villian henchman, who was replaced by a slighly less stoned and more simpering Bez.

All in all, worth my time and $6 to see this in the local neighborhood theater on a holiday friday afternoon.

wait, BEZ was in this?!?

http://depts.washington.edu/kexp/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/Bez.jpg

What manner of death should be wished on people who complain about CGI effects in modern movies?

:P

When it's SHIA LEBOUF FLYING THRU THE JUNGLE WITH NEWFOUND MONKEY FRIENDS bad, i gets to complain

ppl are complainin about the death of dapper debonair bond, and that's fair enough, but i like what has replaced it: endless reserves of willpower and composure bond. i like that he walks out of intense physical violence, still looking like shit, into a hotel, and ignores the stares around him. or has a conversation, pulls off some acrobatic shit over a balcony, and continues the same conversation. and drinks like a fish and doesn't sleep. i like that he's less compartmentalized and has to snap between the commando shit and the GQ society shit from second to second. shirtless bond showing major damage was a good lift from the bale batman.

i did like the stylized titles for the different locations

Morbius, I actually wrote my piece linked above as a long response to your post that relatively good politics couldn't save a mediocre movie, which I think they do, though I'm sure I like the movie and politics better than you do to start with.

The real drama Shakey's missing is that a stepson producer-heir of the Bond franchise, one with experience of and apparent passion for international law, has reshaped an imperial icon into a slyly and also pretty explicitly anti-imperial one. All these little departures add up. As I said in the piece, the National Review took the trouble to attack the film's politics. But the central plot premise of Quantum is straight out of Bolivian current events over recent years. Bond coming out on the left of Obama is pretty major in my psyche.

yes, let him do it next time in a better film. (ie, blame Paul Haggis)

Needed more redhead.
That's what I thought.
This was okay for a feature length commercial, I guess. My friend who really flipped over Casino Royale was disappointed by this.

A feature-length commercial for what? Revenge killing?

Calvin Klein's Vengeance

For action movies.xpost

it was a great commercial for action movies

it made me want to see more action movies

Yeah, that makes sense. I'm not big on action movies, I guess. New ones, anyway. I got lost in trying to remember who it was that Bond was seeking out for revenge and I can't follow all the super closeup action stuff that has become so prevalent in these movies.
I'll exit this thread now, not trying to piss on anyone's parade.

though this was pretty eh but i hadn't seen casino royale or any recent bond movies really. craig was good but a lot of the action, especially the opening sequence, seemed disjointed and confusing. the bourne movies were way better in terms of having crazy fast action that the human brain (or at least my brain) was still capable of processing

^^^^ I agree with that criticism even though I still really liked the movie a lot.

saw this today and thought it was pretty meh... for one thing i didn't really remember any of the plot details from casino royale and so i was pretty lost when they got into that stuff like right away... i kind of think as a matter of principle you shouldn't have to hang onto that shit from movie to movie when it comes to bond stuff. i blame this era's long-arc plot insanity, which is great on TV but generally pretty terrible for movies. action was pretty sub-bourne. and what was with dude getting chewed out every time he killed anybody?? isn't the whole thing that he has a LICENSE to kill??

anyway, in general i guess i approve of new-serious-bond but i do miss the gadgets and shit a bit... i feel like they've gone too far in the grim-faced plotty direction. bond movies shouldn't feel like they're hurrying the plot along and being the second part of a trilogy for christ's sakes.

guess im glad that james bond saved the world from a bolivian water shortage tho.

you guess youre glad??

ppl are complainin about the death of dapper debonair bond, and that's fair enough, but i like what has replaced it: endless reserves of willpower and composure bond. i like that he walks out of intense physical violence, still looking like shit, into a hotel, and ignores the stares around him. or has a conversation, pulls off some acrobatic shit over a balcony, and continues the same conversation. and drinks like a fish and doesn't sleep. i like that he's less compartmentalized and has to snap between the commando shit and the GQ society shit from second to second. shirtless bond showing major damage was a good lift from the bale batman.

― as a dude (goole), Monday, December 1, 2008 4:09 PM (4 weeks ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

well said, i feel much the same.

ya im into that, i just wouldn't mind some cool rocket pens or something too

well, there's a sony cybershot

and some minority reprt cyber screens

I loved the villain, he was like Serge Gainsbourg crossed with an International Male catalog.

i was hoping he'd end up being a cured version of his character from diving bell & the butterfly... emerges from an armoured diving bell, signature move is pinning a butterfly on his victims... signature mannerism is a coy wink

I remember cheering on bond and being really pleased with the new bond chick. I think I was more happy to see any bond film, than I was was happy when I actually watched this film. That and because I was sobering up, made me realize, halfway into the movie, that what I was watching actually sucked. The ending, the only part I can remember somewhat well, when the fire was in some building in Bolivia; that part sucked. I drove home thinking "what a sucky film that was". I wonder how much of that is truth, or whether I can blame it on sobering up causing symptoms of depression. Is that what sobering up does? nahhh, the movie probably just sucked balls. This doesn't mean I dislike Craig. I just rather have a film with over the top action instead of a realism driven, chopped up, speed fighting scenes. You could say over-the-top is what made bond awesome. Like sucking air out of a car tire to hide after the car ended up underwater...

And bring back crazier looking enemies please. With crazy skills at something weird like throwing hats or knives or whatever.

Just watched this and enjoyed it even though it seemed to cram an awful lot in almost 2 hours.

Speaking from the context of someone who has just watched his first two James Bond films ever, I kinda don't understand the critical drubbing this received, particularly in comparison to Casino Royale. I mean, they're both kinda just dumb and flashy and plothole-ridden action movies at the end of the day, but I'd say I preferred QoS to CR (although QoS obvs doesn't function as a discrete film separate from CR). That said, these felt like relatively anemic copies of the Bourne and M:I films (which I assume have, in turn, derived and refined a lot of stuff from the earlier Bond movies).

Casino Royale has more coherent and purposeful action sequences than QoS, is more emotionally engaging, plus as a life-long Bond watcher, I can say it just feels a lot more Bond-y.

CR is one of the best Bond films, but is sort of a commentary on the earlier entries so is probably not the best one to start with.

Try From Russia With Love.

try North by Northwest

back to rewatching Bonds after seeing Spectre. I remember fuck all about this one, I remember being stoked to see it cos the trailer was badass and then getting so bored I don't think I finished it?

also feel like Craig's head has gotten wider in each film

watched as part of the Dan Craig 'quadrilogy' this has some perfectly fine moments IMO!

James Bond and His Quantum of Solace