Quantum Of Solace

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Spoiler Spoiler:

Totally agreed. There could've been other ways to imply it rather than just putting it onscreen. That was totally out of place and wholly inappropriate for a PG-13 film, imo. (I have the same feelings about the torture scene in CR)
 
I understand about Never, and I love Goldfinger. It was a different time baqk then. But I just thing Craig captures more of what Ian Flemming intended with the character. Connery is the man, but I don't think we will ever see Craig singing "Underneath the Mango Tree".

Yes, I agree the time periods between Connery and Craig are VERY different. But, that was the ONLY time Connery as Bond ever sang. Plus it was in the first movie, Dr. No. I think he was having fun with Ursula Andress. After that he never sang again.

I thought the torture scene in Casino Royale was great. Again, showing that Bond could be hurt...and endure.

The agent covered in oil in QOS reminded me so much of the girl painted gold in Goldfinger. A nice "nod" to Goldfinger there, whether they intended it or not. I didn't think that showing her that way was too strong for a PG-13 rating. I've seen much worse than that in other PG-13 movies before QOS.
 
I didn't think that showing her that way was too strong for a PG-13 rating. I've seen much worse than that in other PG-13 movies before QOS.

I'm not sure if this was a response to my PG-13 comment or not. If It is, I want to clarify that my comment was referring to the
Spoiler Spoiler:
scene near the end of the movie, not the girl covered in oil.
 
I have just seen the movie
1, worst Bond theme song ever
2, The action scenes were filmed to close up and just looked a mess
3, The film just kinda sucked in general
 
Wow, did we see the same Bond movie? :confused:
The theme song wasn't the best, but okay. The action scenes were great to me. Sucked in general? Not to me.
 
The torture was in the novel, and...

Spoiler Spoiler:


Yes, the action scenes would have been awesome if you could see exactly what was happening.

Casino Royale did this great.

But I guess some people need to have this ^^^^ty editing to feel an adrenaline rush, were I get it from watching the choreography. I just felt aggravated. Heck the making-of on Starz! had better camera angles.

Song is one of the worst and the opening credits just seemed dull. The CGI Bond was horrible.

Now, there was some pretty cool stuff in the movie. The fight before meeting Camille was good and ended great. The opera was a very cool scene from beginning to end, except

Spoiler Spoiler:


The finale was great and the rest till the last shot of the movie. But,

Spoiler Spoiler:


They did that a few times in the movie. Bond learns something, we don't.

Spoiler Spoiler:


I hope these and other plot points are just something I missed and I'll see in another viewing and not bad writing (or was taken out for the sake of action).
 
Just saw it - thought it was good - there were a lot of scenes where I wanted to know more of what happened - but over all I was entertained. Did like Casino better.....but overall still a good action flick.
 
Just saw it and thought it was a great companion film to CR, which is probably my favorite Bond film and I'm a huge Bond-nut from way back.

I think Craig is the best Bond, but he's really playing a different character. He's the "blunt instrument" that M calls him in CR - he doesn't really think - he acts on instinct and sometimes gets carried away with the violence rather than doing what the case calls for.

Spoiler Spoiler:
 
Saw it this evening.

I thought it was excellent. It really completed the transition of Bond that CR started. Gone are the overworked quips, the overblown gadgets and the ageless agent who never gets a scratch. Instead we get a brutal, complicated man's journey from just being a killing machine to actually learning the hard way what his place is in the secret-laden, double-crossing world he inhabits as an agent of her Majesty's Secret Service.

I really appreciated how through some very well-done storytelling shorthand, we get a great sense how the different people Bond crosses paths with affect his life, most especially M. The cast was terrific, not a bad one in the bunch. And Craig? Well, I don't think he HAS to be "better" than any Bond preceding him...but he really makes Bond his own here. The man exudes "dangerous" and yet gives off an air of intelligence. It's a great performance. He makes the action look like it really hurts and when he throws off a one-liner (there were a few), they aren't the obvious "please laugh here" types...they just add to the character. I'm delighted to read in the trades that he's on for at least two more. QoS was a great completion to this arc of Bond's story...like "The Dark Knight" earlier this summer, it's left us really wanting to know where he goes from here.

Were there some tech issues? Just a few...I agree with those who've commented that the whole "shakey-cam" hyperactive editing style for action scenes is a bit hard on the eyes and comprehension, but it also begs for some repeat viewings for a chance to further decipher it all. And yes...the opening theme was rather dull. I also got tired of the graphics departments "fun with fonts" in indicating what location we were in.

But those few issues were washed away by some really inspired scenes. The opera scene was one of the best in any Bond film...just amazing. Some of the visual touches were great, like the poor Ms. Fields becoming a sly nod to "Goldfinger" all black while M looks on dressed in pure white. Cool stuff...

I think the Bond franchise has rebounded quite well from it's '90's excesses and here's hoping we get a few more outings with Craig that are as well-crafted and compelling as CR and QoS are...
 
Spoiler Spoiler:


I was kinda wtf on that myself.

It was just how the scene played out.

Spoiler Spoiler:


I went to the QoS Wiki page to see if I could find any answers on my other questions.

Spoiler Spoiler:


Was that explained in the movie and I just forgot? Though while thinking about the scene I did come to that conclusion.

Now, a Mr. White quote.

Spoiler Spoiler:
 
Just saw it and thought it was a great companion film to CR, which is probably my favorite Bond film and I'm a huge Bond-nut from way back.

I think Craig is the best Bond, but he's really playing a different character. He's the "blunt instrument" that M calls him in CR - he doesn't really think - he acts on instinct and sometimes gets carried away with the violence rather than doing what the case calls for.

Spoiler Spoiler:

I can agree with pretty much all of that. This is a different bond then the connery/etc. Bond's a blunt instrument, he's there to get the job done no matter what.

Not going to put it in spoilers because it's old. Mathis was working for Le Chiffe the entire time during Casino Royale. When Bond found out about his tell, Mathis told Le Chiffe about it, thus Bond lost all of his money the first time. So when he said that Mathis was his friend, Bond knew that it was Mathis that told Le Chiffe about his tell and allowed Le Chiffe to beat Bond the first time.

About Yusef,
Spoiler Spoiler:


About Mr. White saying that to Bond
Spoiler Spoiler:


ANY WHO, I liked the movie a lot, but Casino Royale was FAR superior IMO. Love the action scenes in this one, but the story and plot wasn't as intriguing as CR. Can't wait for the next one.
 
Yeah, that's what I was thinking on Mr. White. Killing Bond was the other, but that doesn't make sense because they had plenty of chances.

I dug around and I found this on Mathis from another board.

Bond only told two people about Le Chiffre's bluff. Someone told Le Chiffre. He put the blame on Mathis.

Le Chiffre told Bond Mathis was working for him, which confirms it for Bond. But he wasn't. It was to use Vesper as a bargaining chip.
 
jedibear said:
It really completed the transition of Bond that CR started.

Indeed. It seems that some thought that transition was complete after Casino Royale, but there's so much more to the character that one film wouldn't suffice to create a three-dimensional character worthy of the audiences attention. I think some fans just expected a big empty action film, since they figured Bond was Bond now. That's not the films fault, that's the fault of certain audience members who expected one thing and got something different and unique and even challenging for this type of film.

Kabukiman, what rape scene are you referring to? I think the general attempted to rape a girl, but was killed by Olga's character in the process.

Also, the film posted a $27 million opening Friday with a project $72 million opening weekend, nearly doubling Casino Royale's $40 million opening. Yeah, I think it'll be a big hit. ;) Word of mouth seems more positive since the film actually opened and people have now seen it.
 
Kabukiman, what rape scene are you referring to? I think the general attempted to rape a girl, but was killed by Olga's character in the process.

That's the one. Something about brutalizing a woman, then throwing her on a bed in an attempt to have sex with her while she is screaming and crying doesn't seem very PG-13 to me no matter whether there was penetration or not.
 
But those few issues were washed away by some really inspired scenes. The opera scene was one of the best in any Bond film...just amazing.

:lecture

I totally agree. The opera scene was beautifully executed. That is probably the stand-out scene in the entire film, for me.

And yes, whether the girl was raped or not, the scene could have been done differently. It was borderline R and didn't belong.
 
Back
Top