Sign in or 
Share this
Green-Arrow |
OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 1:27 AM EST
I know *some* of you are midnight-on-opening-day types. Myself, I'm more of a Sunday-matinee type. But I know those of you returning fresh from the theaters are ready to crow (or grouse), so let's hear it... what's the verdict?
7
out of
15 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
Gettler |
1. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 2:16 AM EST
Well, I'm new here, so I won't go off on a tangent and wear out my welcome, but I didn't like it. Whereas Casino Royale had breaks between the action, QoS jumps all over the place. The villain was weak and most of the time the camera movement was so choppy I didn't know what the heck was going on. I actually did like the opening song of the movie, but wasn't a huge fan of the opening credits. Those who like a certain missing 'key' classic element will be surprised to see its inclusion in the film, though not where you'd expect it. This film, if anything, made me grow even more tired of Dench's role as M. She is such a concerned grandmother in this film...it's just annoying. I'd like to see M changed to someone who might channel some Bernard Lee - he appears in the film as the foreign secretary, played by Tim Pigott-Smith. His words in the film were among some of the best, and considering how annoyed I was by that point in the film, they almost seemed to help parody the film. The plot was thin...etc etc. The action was too choppy as I've already said. Many people are calling this a 'Bourne wannabe' and I can see their point - the second unit is comprised of some of the Bourne people. 12 out of 17 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Posted Anonymously |
2. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 3:09 AM EST
This movie was okay - decent, not great and would have made a better Bourne movie. Some of the classic Bond pieces were noticably missing. A few things that could bother you: it's difficult to follow the opening scenes from the camera shaking all over the place - your eyes will hurt; the classic movie opening of Bond shooting at the screen was at the end instead of the beginning???; great Bond themes (View to a Kill, Living Daylights, For Your Eyes Only, etc) had the title in the song, this one didn't; we're still missing "Q"; no classic "Bond. James Bond." lines; no classic Bond drink; "M" was really over the top with the protective, "You're suspended Bond - No, I need you - You're out - No I need you" motherly type; and finally, the conclusion is not there as we still have several questions left unanswered. I have a hunch that the next one will play out like a continuation ala Fox's TV show "24". This movie gets a 6 out of 10. "Casino Royale" was better.
8
out of
13 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
alexberg |
3. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 12:01 PM EST
Fantastic. First, I really enjoyed it as a film - James Bond movie aside. Great script, cinematography, score, chemistry between leads, etc. As a James Bond Movie I really, really liked it. A great sequel to be sure. I did find it feeling less Bond like in that is missing some of the traditional elements as some folks have noted above. More to come as I collect my thoughts and reflect!
12
out of
19 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
timconnery007 |
4. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 1:36 PM EST
I agree, Alexberg. Quantum of Solace really proved the fact that Craig is the one, just the kind of actor suitable for the role. I really enjoyed it myself, the sequel, the car chase, almost everything except for the soundtrack. I can't really explain why I didn't like it, but...there's just something in that song that didn't catch my attention. I know all music styles very well and all I can say is that I get the feeling "Another Way To Die" was written as a soundtrack for another movie. It really doesn't suit the Bond trilogy, as I would sayStill, I'm thrilled by Quantum of Solace and I wonder how the 23rd film will look like. 6 out of 14 found this valuable. Do you? |
champmd11 |
5. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 1:41 PM EST
"I agree, Alexberg. Quantum of Solace really proved the fact that Craig is the one, just the kind of actor suitable for the role. "100% agree When Daniel Craig was chosen for the role – I was skeptical – but after CR and now QoS – I think he is a perfect BOND 13 out of 21 found this valuable. Do you? |
e007bond1016 |
6. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 5:36 PM EST
I thought it was a great movie. I dont see it as being a "bourne wannabe" when it was nothing of the sort. Things were crazy and mixed up because they were supposed to be. Bond has been through into a world of chaos. M's part in the movie was great as well. There was life for M. she was no longer just sitting around in an office. I love how they utilized the gunbarrel although I wont mention what I mean in case others havent seen it but trust me you will know. This movie indicates that he is now Bond. He will have missions women, gadgets, cars, everything Bond has had before and I cannot wait until the next film.
6
out of
10 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
e007bond1016 |
7. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 5:50 PM EST
I would also like to mention that I loved the way ***SPOLIERS***** Fields was found dead. Anyone notice what classic Bond scene that looked like? Goldfiner...
8
out of
9 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
Jaybird0027 |
8. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 10:01 PM EST
"I would also like to mention that I loved the way ***SPOLIERS***** Fields was found dead. Anyone notice what classic Bond scene that looked like? Goldfiner..."sorry e007bond1016, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. That scene in goldfinger is such a classic and QoS just stole it and threw it in this movie. I thought the movie was decent, could have done without that scene. I do think that Craig is playing a good Bond, at first I did not like him but he is proving to be a good Bond. However, they desperately need to bring Q back into the picture, nothing says James Bond without him. 5 out of 6 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Posted Anonymously |
9. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 10:49 PM EST
the scene with fields was wayyyyy too much like goldfinger. the girl was in the exact same position on the bed as jill masterson was.the opening of the movie made me sad cuz the key element to any bond intro was missing..but it was at the end. which im hoping meant that the prequel crap is done and they can get back to making classic good ol' fashion bond movies. the biggest downside to the movie was the fact that it had non stop action. like a bourne movie. sure bond movies have train fights. car / boat / plane chases. but not every 5 minutes. i want them to start making bond movies the way they had from dr. no all the way to the world is not enough...die another day doesnt count :P i guess these two prequels just set bond up to be the cold, distant, agent he is who doesnt trust people. like he is in all the other bond movies 8/10 overall casino royale was better 3 out of 5 found this valuable. Do you? |
DarakuTenshi |
10. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 14 2008, 11:51 PM EST
I liked it quite a bit. At first I thought this really didn't feel like a Bond movie as such until I sat and thought about it for a while. Since this is supposed to be a young James Bond and many of the Bond trade marks were not present can be explained. Such as the no gadgets present was because Q branch had not been introduced yet. Or the whole Bond James Bond that too had not been used because Bond had not yet met Sylvia Trench where he mocked her after she introduced her self as Trench, Sylvia Trench. And he followed up with well... you get the point. But I think it would be nice on Bond 23 to get back to the good old Bond again.
5
out of
6 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
mkfreeberg |
11. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 15 2008, 12:18 AM EST
It really would've helped to have a Moneypenny or a Q. One or the other, at the very end. They didn't do either one. Apologies if anybody considers that to be a spoiler...I think it's sort of on the line, maybe.This debate shown in the trailer about whether Bond was motivated by duty or by revenge -- it was a pretty silly argument to be having, wasn't it? Her Majesty's Government really didn't have a dog in the hunt. Some bug-eyed creepy dude is gonna starve a bunch of poor people out of their, uh, precious resource, and extort some fat smelly deposed-general dude out of a bunch of money...I don't even follow what any of this has to do with introducing Stephen Obanno to Le Chiffre. Or getting the money back when it goes missing. I've complained before about those henchmen attacking Roger Moore in the belly-dancer's dressing room in Beirut, how the spoiler later on in TMWTGG entirely deprives them of purpose other than the "it's time for a fight" thing. That whole action sequence before the opening credits? That's kind of like more of the same. Those bad-guys didn't belong there, y'know? 2 out of 4 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Posted Anonymously |
12. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 15 2008, 1:50 AM EST
I liked it very much :DBut there are some aspects of the film that might rub hardcore 007 fans the wrong way; it's not a stereotypical Bond film. For example, 007 is covered in dirt the majority of the time, a lot of the movie was set in not-so-glamorous places, and there wasn't a lot of emphasis on women. \ But, the movie was important and enjoyable to watch. The holes regarding Vesper were filled in, the action was amazing (though the camerawork could have been better), and Daniel Craig IMO did a wonderful job portraying 007. 4 out of 4 found this valuable. Do you? |
Cedric(006) |
13. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 15 2008, 1:55 AM EST
Whew. OK, here we go:First off, I'd just like to say the movie started out the best way to draw any sane individual - with action, sweet ass moves, and to top it off mates - a sweet action sequence. The car chase was brillently put together, better than that World Record 9 flips in Casino Royale. Quantum of Solace's beginning has to be the best thus far in the series -the action was there. The character (and double agent) Mitchel was brillently cast and played. He began to circulate "Oh my lord - can we really trust anyone" For God's sake, he was M's body guard for 6 (or was it 8) years! And then he shoots to kill M and Bond. By the way, that scene was brillently set up: "We have members everywhere, isn't that right..." (BOOM). Plus, didnt look like M got hit by the way she flinched? The Mitch chase was great as well. Again, they went back to what worked well in Casino Royale - A freerunning scene. So now we have two good qualities Casino Royale had that QOS has - A car chase and a freeruunning sequence. The sad , and low point, cam when Rene Mathis died. Bond again feels that quality from Casino Royale. The loss of a loved one. Didn't like how he just threw him in the garbage though - but that is the way he would have wanted it. Another good reference came in the Oil scene with AKA Fields - her ENTIRE body was covered in oil. Does that remind anybody of someone <cough..Goldfinger..cough> Ironoically enough, we see Bond give Greene an oil can to "drink after the 20 or so mile" Haha. Good stuff. That too brings another great scene - the duel royale between Greene and Bond. Finally, a Quantum agent who can duke it out with Bond, even though he did grunt every time he swung. Oh age does have a factor! Plus, it had that "Oh my lord, I just crapped my pants" factor. Sorry will continue! 3 out of 4 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Cedric(006) |
14. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 15 2008, 2:01 AM EST
Back to the "crap your pants factor" did any literally piss themselves when that plane came shooting over Bond. When I went and watched it, I lifted out of my seat.All-in-all, I enjoyed QOS. I don't care what anyones says, a top 3 Bond Film. I'll just have to re-watch some of my other top film choices tonight! Cedric 5 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you? |
beatlehead |
15. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 15 2008, 7:04 AM EST
Anyone else think Jesper Christensen bears a striking resemblance to a certain 007 author?
6
out of
7 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
mkfreeberg |
16. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 15 2008, 9:58 AM EST
Yes. And I like what they did with him.The turncoat shot the "red shirt" and left Bond and M unscratched. I realize they had to do that, but that was stupid. That bothered me quite a bit. If I'm blowing a 13-year-old cover to take down some MI6 agents and protect my beloved Quantum organization, my one bullet is for Bond, no questions asked. Or maybe M. But probably Bond. Anyone who's seen the end of "Unforgiven" can figure that out. I know we've been anticipating this thing for years, and it hurts to admit it, but someone's gotta say it... 1. It seems he didn't even sleep with his leading lady. That would be a first, wouldn't it? 2. The camera was shaky during the action scenes. 3. The villains were weak. 4. Generally, there were so many Bond elements missing that it ended up not having a great deal to do with Bond. Any one of those four, or two of those four, could be overlooked partially or entirely. As a whole, they create a real problem. The consensus that has emerged from Rotten Tomatoes is (and this is rare) an echo of my opinion. It's definitely "fresh"; it's a decent film. It does not rate as higly as Casino Royale, and in that sense, fails to satisfy. It is the nature of sequels to be inferior to what inspired them -- but I'm afraid this is something of a case of overpromising and underdelivering. Nice effort, Mr. Forster. Good-enough results. Adequate contribution. Didn't suck. Still and all, let's make this your one-and-only. I've got the impression your passions are invested in something else. Having said that, Daniel Craig met, and surpassed, expectations. 3 out of 5 found this valuable. Do you? |
koolkikij |
17. RE: OK, how was it?
Nov 15 2008, 11:57 AM EST
"All-in-all, I enjoyed QOS. I don't care what anyones says, a top 3 Bond Film. I'll just have to re-watch some of my other top film choices tonight!That's what I did when I got home. I watched some of my favorite classics. But, now onto QoS. The bottom line is it is no Casino Royale, but it was still extremely good! One of my top three Bond movies for sure. I thought Daniel Craig made a superb 007, and Amalric did a great job portraying the villain, Dominic Greene (although he was no Le Chiffre!). It was good to see a villain fight back like Greene did. Overall, I loved the movie, especially the scene where Jill Masterson made a cameo. Wait, she didn't make a cameo... 3 out of 4 found this valuable. Do you? |
Jake12001200 |
18. It was rubbish!!
Nov 15 2008, 3:53 PM EST
Saw it today 15 November and it was no where near as good as any of the other films I have seen!!!It coped the bit when the girl was oiled from goldfinger when the girl got painted gold!! 9 out of 13 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Posted Anonymously |
19. RE: It was rubbish!!
Nov 15 2008, 4:15 PM EST
Ultimately I was disappointed. Thought the action scenes were well done, but there we far far far too many of them, to the level where they just became boring. Thought the story was bland, the bad guy a non-entity and the dialogue poor.I thought Craig's performance in Casino Royale was poor, but in this he was truly awful, his facial expression never changed once, neither did his tone of voice. All the one liners (an essential of Bond) were done by M, the one done by Bond, got a slight snigger out of one person in the entire cinema. An awful Bond song. The filming was annoying, changing angles too much. Overall there have been a few bad films down the Bond years, but for me this is by far the worst of the lot. All I can say is its time for Broccoli and her team to go before they completely ruin the Bond franchise. If this was an ordinary action film, I would say it was average, as a Bond, it was just awful, there was nothing Bond about it, just a typical mediocre action film. 13 out of 24 found this valuable. Do you? |
