I agree with you about both movies.
I'm off to go watch Goldfinger and then From Russia With Love.
Dear god Quantum of Solace is so boring
- Thread starter Candlelight
- Start date
I agree with you about both movies.
I'm off to go watch Goldfinger and then From Russia With Love.
I sat through Quantum of Solace, never before having seen a James Bond movie, and I found it utterly dreadful. Is this what so many people are fan of? At the end of the movie, I was still wondering when the intro scene would finally be done and the movie would start. I got an idea about James Bond through media attention over the years, but at this rate, Austin Powers is a better James Bond then Bond himself would ever be.
Should I just give up, or are there other Bond movies that are much, much better?
Should I just give up, or are there other Bond movies that are much, much better?
I wasn't particularly pleased.
To date, the best review of the film I've read is the one over at The Best Page in The Universe.
To date, the best review of the film I've read is the one over at The Best Page in The Universe.
You certainly need to see a Connery or Moore Bond to see what a Bond movie is all about. There's some good ones out there, try Goldfinger, From Russia With Love, The Spy Who Loved Me, Dr. No, You Only Live Twice, etc. Even if you don't like them you can at least say you've experienced a classic Bond movie.
I thought the plane sequence was really unnecessary and CGI Craig was no better.
I'd say "QOS" was Craig's "The World is Not enough" Exciting opening but boring overall.
I'd say "QOS" was Craig's "The World is Not enough" Exciting opening but boring overall.
I wanted to fully contribute to this thread but then realised I remember very little about the film and my thoughts at the time. I suppose that says it all really.
No humor. Bond wasn't in control. He was a morose antihero with nothing to connect to.
This is a lesson that all franchises should be what they are, and not try to imitate whatever the fashion of the day happens to be. Fantasy spies like Bond are out of fashion; "gritty, real-world" long-suffering, angsty types like Bourne and Bauer are in. I personally prefer that type and have never much cared for Bond, but Bond has his fans and it's not fair - and not particularly even useful - to shoehorn him into the fashionable mold.
Look at Star Trek: doing wonderfully, being what it is. Going against the "gritty, realistic" trend of sci fi that happens to be (sort of) currently fashionable and everyone loves it for it.
Dinosauricon
Lieutenant
Isn't the Craig Bond an attempt to do the James Bond of the original novels, like with Dalton?
It seems like there's been a split in Bond fandom: Those who prefer the gritty, more cold-blooded Bond of the novels and the last two films and those who enjoy the woman-chasing, quipping, gadget laden Bond of most of the films.
Anyway, I think Quantum's main problem was that they got a drama director, like they did with The World Is Not Enough. Apted and Foster are good directors on other projects but they can't really handle something on the scale of a Bond film. Campbell is a more experienced action director.
It seems like there's been a split in Bond fandom: Those who prefer the gritty, more cold-blooded Bond of the novels and the last two films and those who enjoy the woman-chasing, quipping, gadget laden Bond of most of the films.
Anyway, I think Quantum's main problem was that they got a drama director, like they did with The World Is Not Enough. Apted and Foster are good directors on other projects but they can't really handle something on the scale of a Bond film. Campbell is a more experienced action director.
Since I was going to Siena soon afterwards, I was excited to see the Palio recreated. I found the movie to be entertaining enough to get through, but not enough to rewatch (although I might watch the opening because of the Siena connection).
Come on, that movie was as angsty as all get out.
I watched it again just last night, and didn't so much find it "boring" as "uninvolving". There's no time allowed for setup, no reason to take an interest in the characters or what they're doing. Bond starts off mid-car chase - why? Who's chasing him? For what reason? And unless you just rewatched Casino Royale and remember some guy who appeared in about two scenes, you still won't know until several minutes later (after the titles!), by which time the moment has long passed.
The rest of the film is a procession of: Bond discovers a plot-point location > goes there > gets into a frenziedly-cut fight or chase within 60 seconds > repeat. Christ, I love action movies, but this just got numbing in very short order.
The rest of the film is a procession of: Bond discovers a plot-point location > goes there > gets into a frenziedly-cut fight or chase within 60 seconds > repeat. Christ, I love action movies, but this just got numbing in very short order.
That is probably the worst movie review that has ever been written for any movie. I get it that the guy didn't like the movie, but he clearly misses the mark on what didn't work in the movie and instead bitches about symbolism and the lack of violence (?!) in the opening section of the movie where you clearly saw a random person get shot down. He also claims that Marc Forster stole (and specifically called it theft) from something that really happened. Well, for one, I don't think you can really "steal" things that really happened; two, Bond movies have been using things from the real world as inspiration for plotlines many times in the past; and three, I find it interesting that he doesn't lay one finger of blame on Paul Haggis for the storyline.
That review was clearly written from someone who didn't bother seeing the movie and pieced a fanboy rant together from various websites and blog posts. The movie had it's issues, but this guy clearly didn't know what he was talking about.
I almost couldn't believe what I was watching when I saw QoS. I mean, I guess I liked it, but much of the talk before, during and after Casino Royal was of a Bond less heavy on the action, but then they go and follow it up with most 'actiony' Bond to date *facepalm*
Read some of his other articles. Maddox isn't intended to be taken seriously. Complaining about a movie review from Maddox is like complaining about The Angry Video Game Nerd not being fair to a game he reviews.
Anyway, here's another vote for hating the movie. Completely uninteresting in every way.
Quantum of Solace was not as great as Casino Royale and Tomorrow Never Dies, roughly comparable to the overrated GoldenEye, but better than The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day. I found it a flawed movie rather than a boring one.
Boy, you nailed it. What crap. The one before it was at least tolerable.
Gimme more like Goldeneye & Tomorrow Never Dies. PLEASE!
The Craig run of Bond films are missing a certain something. They're not over the top nonsense like the bulk of the Brosnon movies but the Craig movies are just, I dunno, dull. I can watch the Connery bond movies anytime one is on. The Craig movies I'm fine seeing just once. They have no energy, no Bond-iness. Where's the gadgets? The iconic use of the theme? Bond's wit and charm? Craig's bond is just a dense, rough-looking, thug rather than a charming, suave, man of action and intrigue.
And QoS SORELY missed having a Bond girl. The girl in the movie is attractive enough but she's no iconic beauty like a Bond girl should be. (Hell, the skinny chick that gets the Oilfinger treatment was more a Bond girl.)
And QoS SORELY missed having a Bond girl. The girl in the movie is attractive enough but she's no iconic beauty like a Bond girl should be. (Hell, the skinny chick that gets the Oilfinger treatment was more a Bond girl.)