Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Double agent question

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Double agent question Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Double agent question - 27/11/2008 10:17:10 AM   
Rumbaabaa


Posts: 1318
Joined: 25/11/2005
From: York
Just saw this last night and wasn't very impressed. Apart from severly lacking a sense of fun, what annoyed me was the inexplicable plot developments. Sorry if this has already been covered, but can someone explain the following?:

Mr White is captured and in an MI6 interrogation room in Italy. M, Bond and severl other MI6 agents are there. White says something like "We have people everywhere. Isn't that right?" On that cue, one of the agents starts shooting everyone else. Bond chases and kills him. Later M tells Bond how this guy has been with MI6 for 8 years, yet all the time he's been a double agent.

Here's my question - why would a double agent spend 8 years undercover only to blow his cover like that? If he wanted to free Mr White there'd be easier and less dangerous ways; ditto if he wanted to kill British agents. It made no sense to me. Have I got something wrong here?

(in reply to simonb4)
Post #: 421
RE: Double agent question - 28/11/2008 6:27:19 PM   
matty_b


Posts: 14580
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.
quote:

White says something like "We have people everywhere. Isn't that right?" On that cue, one of the agents starts shooting everyone else. Bond chases and kills him. Later M tells Bond how this guy has been with MI6 for 8 years, yet all the time he's been a double agent.

Here's my question - why would a double agent spend 8 years undercover only to blow his cover like that? If he wanted to free Mr White there'd be easier and less dangerous ways; ditto if he wanted to kill British agents. It made no sense to me. Have I got something wrong here?


My guess was that when Mr White said that, that was his code word to blow his cover. I think he was always taking his cue from him.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.

Post #: 422
RE: Quantum of Solace - 29/11/2008 9:22:39 AM   
Kazuya


Posts: 7978
Joined: 23/8/2006
From: The Eighth Dimension c/o Buckaroo Banzai
Uhm, are there problems with this tread? Can't seem to find the posts I made yesterday.

_____________________________

"Bleed, bastard."

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 423
RE: Quantum of Solace - 29/11/2008 9:24:29 AM   
Gimli The Dwarf


Posts: 78040
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Central Park Zoo
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kazuya

Uhm, are there problems with this tread? Can't seem to find the posts I made yesterday.


It's a forumwide problem. Most of the posts from yesterday have gone.


_____________________________

So, sir, we let him have it right up! And I have to report, sir, he did not like it, sir.

Fellow scientists, poindexters, geeks.

Yeah, Mr. White! Yeah, science!

Much more better!

(in reply to Kazuya)
Post #: 424
RE: Quantum of Solace - 29/11/2008 9:27:46 AM   
Kazuya


Posts: 7978
Joined: 23/8/2006
From: The Eighth Dimension c/o Buckaroo Banzai
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gimli The Dwarf

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kazuya

Uhm, are there problems with this tread? Can't seem to find the posts I made yesterday.


It's a forumwide problem. Most of the posts from yesterday have gone.



Well that's just great.

_____________________________

"Bleed, bastard."

(in reply to Gimli The Dwarf)
Post #: 425
Bond's Quantum - 29/11/2008 2:47:34 PM   
lynnshep


Posts: 428
Joined: 17/1/2007
From: USA
Fast paced, more action than Casino. Craig is still a great Bond and the plot takes a while to build and to connect into the previous film and a larger Bond mythology. Great movie.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 426
Bond's Quantum - 29/11/2008 2:48:07 PM   
lynnshep


Posts: 428
Joined: 17/1/2007
From: USA
Fast paced, more action than Casino. Craig is still a great Bond and the plot takes a while to build and to connect into the previous film and a larger Bond mythology. Great movie.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 427
RE: Quantum of Solace - 29/11/2008 7:16:43 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
Quantum of Solace (Forster, 2008):



At some point during the last reel, I looked down at my hands to see why they'd gone numb.  Turns out that clenching your fists so hard that your fingernails almost pierce the skin will do that.

There's something oddly liberating about walking into a film with zero expectation.  I suppose the deafening silence that reverberated in the film world in place of wall-to-wall praise everyone was anticipating from Bond's latest outing meant that I was perhaps more willing to allow the film to take me in the direction that it wanted to go instead of me trying to pull it one way as it attempted to go completely another.  Consequently, I ended up having the most fun I've ever had at an action movie in quite some time.

Let's start where the film starts.  And continues.  And finishes.  I am, of course, talking about the action.  It pulsates with a ferocity that the latter two Bourne films tried to create but fell far short in their attempts to do so.  Whereas Greengrass' overuse of long lenses and excessively kinetic handheld photography throughout his films' run times caused the entirety of both of them to pass by in an near-incomprehensible blur, Forster's judicious and inventive conception and execution of the action in Quantum of Solace means that the experience is remarkably fluid and perpetually engaging.  Of course, Greengrass' woes were aggravated by the fact that his choppy editing removed all remaining semblances of geographical orientation within a given scene, but Forster manages to use the editing to supplement the already sublime action cinematography to add that final kinetic kick that makes the nature of the violence beautifully fearsome.  Yes, the film is heavy on action, but it's perfectly in line with Bond's rampant state of mind.  And like a true thriller, it twists and turns and keeps you on the edge of your seat so that, unlike the rather mundane and predictable set pieces in Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace keeps its audience enthralled by bombarding it with exhilarating and, sometimes, darkly humourous action beats.

The visual style of the film is also very unique.  Forster employs a neat visual trick to denote place names in a way that's actually more effective on its audience than the usual white text tucked at the bottom of the screen every time we come to a new country.  The panoramic shots are also more breathtaking than those from Royale, and even the more sober moments are filmed in a way that's just off-beat enough to keep you interested.

There's a scene about half way through the film where a very significant character dies.  And I have to say that I almost cried.  Most unexpected.  I didn't think I'd ever feel that particular emotion in a Bond film, and yet there it was.  And this is reflective of the quality of the rest of the film's dealings with the emotional context of both Bond and the main "Bond girl", Camille, played with surprising sensitivity by Olga Kurylenko.  Amidst all the explosions and flying shrapnel that pervades the film's climax, the filmmakers still manage to find a small moment that echoed Bond's moment in the shower with Vesper in Casino Royale.  Yet another unexpected but absolutely welcome emotional surprise.  And what of the main man himself?  Well, I must say that Craig looks a lot more at ease in the role this time around.  By its very nature, being "cool" is something that needs to appear effortless.  If it isn't, it just looks like you're trying too hard.  And there are moments in Casino Royale where Craig looked like he was doing just that.  Trying way too hard to be cool.  In this film, the cool just glides off him in the way it should have always been.  Maybe it was because he was a little too bulky in Royale.  Maybe it was because it was his first time as Bond.  Maybe it was because it seemed like the whole world was against his casting in the role.  Whatever the reason, it has now become irrelevant.  Craig has finally inhabited the role of Bond, and he's never looked or sounded better.  And yes, true to its word, the film manages to scratch beneath that "cool" veneer and we see Bond come to grips with his loss - an arc that's poignantly echoed in Camille's own subplot, and perfectly endnoted with an entirely unanticipated plot twist at the very end - and emerge as the "half monk, half hit man" he once paraphrased M as commanding him to become.

Ultimately, though, I think the reason this film works is because even through many of the superficial trappings of Bond are gone - for example, there is still no "Vodka Martini, shaken not stirred" and now there isn't even the classic "Bond, James Bond" line - what remains (or rather, what has returned) is the sense of the old Bond.  It's that comic book, fantasy spirit that pervades the film in a way that Casino Royale seemed to be trying too hard to escape.  The result was a confused mish-mash that was neither here nor there.  But this film re-captures the true sprit of Bond and the true magic of action cinema when it's done well.

*****

< Message edited by max314 -- 29/11/2008 7:18:44 PM >


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 428
RE: Quantum of Solace - 30/11/2008 12:17:59 PM   
Geldart

 

Posts: 172
Joined: 29/6/2008
film short like this review.bye.

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 429
RE: Quantum of Solace - 30/11/2008 12:19:02 PM   
Geldart

 

Posts: 172
Joined: 29/6/2008
film short like my review.bye

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 430
RE: Quantum of Solace - 30/11/2008 1:49:57 PM   
CreepyThinMan

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 30/11/2008
It was exactly what I was expecting and that’s a bad thing given how low my expectations were. Casino Royale was 2 ½ hours long. QoS is 90 minutes, has four times as much action as CR and, yet, feels completely unsubstantial. The movie is lacking any of the grace, charm or wit that CR had. I feel about this movie the way I did about The Incredible Hulk. Both are minor works and neither reach for anything more then disposable entertainment.

Bond wants revenge for the death of his bitch from the last movie and he hooks up with Camille (Olga Kurylenko) who is also looking for revenge on a minor character. Both Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini) and Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) are back with little to do apart from help Bond for a few minutes and add little or nothing to the overall plot. Both are good actors and they are wasted in this drivel. The woman who plays Camille is painfully generic. Daniel Craig and Dame Judi Dench are solid, as always, but that’s because they are given the time to flesh out their characters in this movie. Mathieu Amalric (Munich, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) is the big bad of the movie and although he is a fantastic actor, the character he plays is soo under written that he spends most of the movie bugging his eyes out, acting like a creep and is a worthless villain.

People always mention how the Bourne films have been an influence on CR but I think it’s important to note that the first Bourne film (The Bourne Identity) was Directed by Doug Liman who went for a classical style as opposed to the irritating shaky-cam style of Paul Geeengrass who made The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum. We should also remember that CR was Directed by Martin Campbell, who made Goldeneye and The Mask of Zorrow, both of which were very solid, well made movies. Campbell is also a classically styled Director who can get tough and gritty when he wants to but also cares about framing, compositing shots and has a very clean editing style.

The problem with QoS is that the action is near incoherent and has some of the worst editing I have ever seen in a major motion picture, one that reportedly cost 200 million, which recalls the worst moments of Greesgrass’s Bourne films! When it was announced that Marc Foster was going to Direct I had my suspicions about what they were doing because Foster has ZERO track record in this genre. Now my suspicions have been confirmed.

Foster was hired to get the “dramatic” footage while the stunt and FX units shoot the other 75% of the movie. This has been the MO of Producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson for a long time. I’ve always wondered why they have never tried to tap top Directors for this series but I realize that it’s because they don’t want innovation, they want to push product and keep making the same shit they have been for decades, trust me, we will get more of this while CR will be seen as a blip of quality on an otherwise downhill trajectory into Shit City.

Casino Royale was the closest in spirit to Ian Fleming’s original work and I had hoped that the Producers might have started re-adapting the rest of his novels but since Broccoli and Wilson keep hiring the same hacks that wrote The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day, I can only surmise that it’s only a matter of time until the childish stupidity of the previous Bond movies starts to creep back in which is a shame since I think that Craig is the best Bond and I would have liked to have seen him star in a series of quality and distinction.  

(in reply to Geldart)
Post #: 431
RE: Quantum of Solace - 30/11/2008 5:00:22 PM   
sam89


Posts: 568
Joined: 1/5/2008
quote:

ORIGINAL: max314

Let's start where the film starts.  And continues.  And finishes.  I am, of course, talking about the action.  It pulsates with a ferocity that the latter two Bourne films tried to create but fell far short in their attempts to do so.  Whereas Greengrass' overuse of long lenses and excessively kinetic handheld photography throughout his films' run times caused the entirety of both of them to pass by in an near-incomprehensible blur, Forster's judicious and inventive conception and execution of the action in Quantum of Solace means that the experience is remarkably fluid and perpetually engaging.  Of course, Greengrass' woes were aggravated by the fact that his choppy editing removed all remaining semblances of geographical orientation within a given scene, but Forster manages to use the editing to supplement the already sublime action cinematography to add that final kinetic kick that makes the nature of the violence beautifully fearsome. 

It's strange that you say that, because I felt the opposite. The Bourne films use the "shaky-cam" technique to good effect, and I never had trouble following the action. In QoS, I thought that the action scenes (particularly the opening car chase and the foot chase) were pretty much incomprehensible.

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 432
RE: Quantum of Solace - 30/11/2008 8:03:47 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreepyThinMan

It was exactly what I was expecting and that's a bad thing given how low my expectations were. Casino Royale was 2 ½ hours long. QoS is 90 minutes, has four times as much action as CR and, yet, feels completely unsubstantial. The movie is lacking any of the grace, charm or wit that CR had. I feel about this movie the way I did about The Incredible Hulk. Both are minor works and neither reach for anything more then disposable entertainment.

Bond wants revenge for the death of his bitch from the last movie and he hooks up with Camille (Olga Kurylenko) who is also looking for revenge on a minor character. Both Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini) and Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) are back with little to do apart from help Bond for a few minutes and add little or nothing to the overall plot. Both are good actors and they are wasted in this drivel. The woman who plays Camille is painfully generic. Daniel Craig and Dame Judi Dench are solid, as always, but that's because they are given the time to flesh out their characters in this movie. Mathieu Amalric (Munich, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) is the big bad of the movie and although he is a fantastic actor, the character he plays is soo under written that he spends most of the movie bugging his eyes out, acting like a creep and is a worthless villain.

People always mention how the Bourne films have been an influence on CR but I think it's important to note that the first Bourne film (The Bourne Identity) was Directed by Doug Liman who went for a classical style as opposed to the irritating shaky-cam style of Paul Geeengrass who made The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum. We should also remember that CR was Directed by Martin Campbell, who made Goldeneye and The Mask of Zorrow, both of which were very solid, well made movies. Campbell is also a classically styled Director who can get tough and gritty when he wants to but also cares about framing, compositing shots and has a very clean editing style.

The problem with QoS is that the action is near incoherent and has some of the worst editing I have ever seen in a major motion picture, one that reportedly cost 200 million, which recalls the worst moments of Greesgrass's Bourne films! When it was announced that Marc Foster was going to Direct I had my suspicions about what they were doing because Foster has ZERO track record in this genre. Now my suspicions have been confirmed.

Foster was hired to get the "dramatic” footage while the stunt and FX units shoot the other 75% of the movie. This has been the MO of Producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson for a long time. I've always wondered why they have never tried to tap top Directors for this series but I realize that it's because they don't want innovation, they want to push product and keep making the same shit they have been for decades, trust me, we will get more of this while CR will be seen as a blip of quality on an otherwise downhill trajectory into Shit City.

Casino Royale was the closest in spirit to Ian Fleming's original work and I had hoped that the Producers might have started re-adapting the rest of his novels but since Broccoli and Wilson keep hiring the same hacks that wrote The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day, I can only surmise that it's only a matter of time until the childish stupidity of the previous Bond movies starts to creep back in which is a shame since I think that Craig is the best Bond and I would have liked to have seen him star in a series of quality and distinction.  



I agree with you that The Bourne Identity was far, far superior to either of the Greengrass sequels, and I also agree that the latter's "style" is remarkably lazy, annoying and ultimately renders some pretty incoherent action scenes, thus making $150 look like $1.50.

Lame shit.

However, the action scenes in Quantum of Solance don't descend into that same incomprehensibility.  It holds longer on the key shots and the erratic movements are only used to heighten the sense of violence instead of dampening it with an ill-placed cut.

Furthermore, whereas Casino Royale's action scenes were almost useless from a narrative standpoint (a big, gimmicky parkour chase and some Rambo-esque shooty-explody stuff from a protagonist we have no reason to care about, leading to little more than finding the name "Ellipses" is utterly shameful from a writer's perspective), pretty much every action scene in Quantum of Solace turned the story in some way (e.g. the Italian foot chase starts wth a bang - quite literally - as it's revealed that an MI6 agent is actually an operative from Mr. White's organisation, which both provides Bond with a lead on achieving his vengeful mission while also keeping the audience from ever feeling safe again).

Casino Royale doesn't really start until Bond meets Vesper.  That's where the second act should have started.  There's at least 30 minutes of material that could have been cut from that film, which would have left us with a much healthier 114 minute runtime.

By contrast, Quantum of Solace is tight as a motherfucker.  It may be loaded with action, but it actually turns the story instead of just being a pit stop until the next scene.


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to CreepyThinMan)
Post #: 433
RE: Quantum of Solace - 30/11/2008 8:09:34 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
quote:

ORIGINAL: sam89

It's strange that you say that, because I felt the opposite. The Bourne films use the "shaky-cam" technique to good effect, and I never had trouble following the action. In QoS, I thought that the action scenes (particularly the opening car chase and the foot chase) were pretty much incomprehensible.



You're not the first person I've heard say this.

It seems more and more that the different styles suit different people.

Though I'll never be able to understand the argument for Greengrass' Bourne style.  Honestly, there's a point during the fight between Bourne and the other Treadstone operative in The Bourne Supremacy where the two guys have each other in some sort of grapple and the camera points at the fucking floor...

The camera in Solace may be erratic, but at least it's pointing in the right direction...


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to sam89)
Post #: 434
RE: Quantum of Solace - 1/12/2008 9:34:53 AM   
Kazuya


Posts: 7978
Joined: 23/8/2006
From: The Eighth Dimension c/o Buckaroo Banzai
Since my earlier review disappeared into oblivion, I'll do the short version. I was initially a bit apprehensive about Quantum of Solace, the director chosen, Marc Forster seemed like a completely wrong choice, given his greenhorn-ish status as a director of mature dramas. (For the record I absolutely loathed Monster's Ball) But the producers, and star, felt Forster could bring more depth of character and emotion to Bond. Ironically quite the opposite happened, perhaps more on account of Dan Bradley than Forster himself, because Quantum of Solace is anything but a character piece, it's an in-your-face, blow-your-fucking-head-off action thriller. A lot of people, and several respected critics, felt the film had abandoned the usual Bond-formula too much, no one-liners, no glitzy charm. But Quantum of Solace is a sequel, a SEQUEL, which means that Bond can't just fucking turn into Roger Moore without throwing credibility out the window, the action takes place almost immediately after Casino Royale, Bond ain't in a good mood, he's out for blood.
Craig takes the badass Bond he already established so well, and takes it to the max, to superb effect, his performance, as well as the film itself, works brilliantly with what was intended. The plot is relatively complicated, but absorbing, the villain is suitably repugnant, the girls are hot. It's Bond doing his business, but with a grudge.

_____________________________

"Bleed, bastard."

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 435
RE: Quantum of Solace - 1/12/2008 3:54:29 PM   
sam89


Posts: 568
Joined: 1/5/2008
quote:

ORIGINAL: max314

quote:

ORIGINAL: sam89

It's strange that you say that, because I felt the opposite. The Bourne films use the "shaky-cam" technique to good effect, and I never had trouble following the action. In QoS, I thought that the action scenes (particularly the opening car chase and the foot chase) were pretty much incomprehensible.



You're not the first person I've heard say this.

It seems more and more that the different styles suit different people.

Though I'll never be able to understand the argument for Greengrass' Bourne style.  Honestly, there's a point during the fight between Bourne and the other Treadstone operative in The Bourne Supremacy where the two guys have each other in some sort of grapple and the camera points at the fucking floor...

The camera in Solace may be erratic, but at least it's pointing in the right direction...


OK, I agree about that fight in The Bourne Supremacy. I couldn't see what the hell was going on.

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 436
RE: Quantum of Solace - 2/12/2008 4:12:29 AM   
Pigeon Army


Posts: 14612
Joined: 29/1/2006
From: Pixar HQ, George Lucas' Office.
Silly forum software, why do you hate me so?

< Message edited by Pigeon Army -- 2/12/2008 4:47:44 AM >


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rinc
She's supposed to be 13! I'd want her to be very attractive though


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pigeon Army
Stop being mean to Deviation

No.

(in reply to sam89)
Post #: 437
RE: Quantum of Solace - 2/12/2008 4:14:37 AM   
Pigeon Army


Posts: 14612
Joined: 29/1/2006
From: Pixar HQ, George Lucas' Office.
Okay, what the hell? Goddamned forum, triple posting for me. Grrrr.

< Message edited by Pigeon Army -- 2/12/2008 4:33:52 AM >


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rinc
She's supposed to be 13! I'd want her to be very attractive though


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pigeon Army
Stop being mean to Deviation

No.

(in reply to sam89)
Post #: 438
RE: Quantum of Solace - 2/12/2008 4:22:34 AM   
Pigeon Army


Posts: 14612
Joined: 29/1/2006
From: Pixar HQ, George Lucas' Office.
As someone who grew up with Brosnan as his Bond, and as someone who has not seen any Bond before Goldeneye (which remains my favourite), I'm probably one of the least qualified people to pass judgment on a new James Bond film. But here I am, reviewing the latest offering from the Craig-as-Bond stable, Quantum of Solace, a film that has received what can best be described as 'mixed' reviews. Well, allow me to add to the all-on-all fight for opinion superiority here by saying I quite liked Quantum of Solace.

The film starts off on shaky ground. Apparently starting ten-fifteen minutes after the events of Casino Royale, everything in the first ten minutes or so of the film feels underexplained and badly-told compared to the rest of the film. The car chase suffers from Bourne-style shakycam overload, and the footchase over the roofs (rooves?) of the Italian town is a little contrived (not least because it feels like Ultimatum's Tangiers chase), but by the time Bond and his target begin fighting on the ropes in the building being restored, director Forster has found his bearings and the action is slick, well-choreographed and well-filmed. Indeed, the film's greatest strength is the action setpieces, the plane chase, the final battle in the hotel and the boat battle all equally slick and exciting. The accusations of Bond becoming a Bourne copycat and the crappy use of Greengrass' shakycam that many have floated seems disingenious to me, as the action is easy to follow and much more stylish than the overly-gritty, hard-to-follow handycam extravaganza style in the overrated Bourne Ultimatum. Bond still remains Bond, just a more brutal version of him, a result of the portrayal of Bond as an agent coming into his own and developing his trademark style. I should also note that the acting, too, is excellent, with Craig portraying this more despondent, anger-filled Bond with skill and his supporting actors and actresses all doing fine jobs - special mention goes to Giancarlo Giannini, excellent again as Mathis, Jeffrey Wright, also great as Felix in his smaller role, and Matthieu Almaric, whose eco-villain borrows elements from Mikkelsen in Royale and Pryce in Tomorrow Never Dies, a slimy and manipulative bastard who has a completely different public image.

That said, there are flaws in Bond's latest outing outside of the first ten minutes. The opening credits song goes completely against expectations - I am a big fan of Jack White, and respect Alicia Keyes as a vocalist - by being completely shocking vocals-wise, though rather decent instrumentally, letting down the otherwise good retro-style opening credits. The pacing and structure is muddled, too, a lot of the film feeling a bit too rough around the edges in terms of the urgency of some things and the timeframe of others, a side effect of the occasionally-lacklustre editing. Also, like Empire said, Quantum of Solace isn't really anyone's idea of fun, the sequences with Gemma Arterton (who is woefully underused) and the action sequences being about as light-hearted as it gets, the scenes with Arterton particularly hinting at a more classic Bond to come, one not afraid to use one-liners or bed beautiful women just for kicks. However, as it stands, Bond's latest outing has nowhere near the number of problems detractors would attest to, and the argument that it's basically copying Bourne is rather silly - then again, if character development and faster editing make something a copy of Bourne, I'll take that copy.

Quantum of Solace is a very good entry into the Bond canon, and a very good film in its own right, but not without its fair share of flaws.

4/5

< Message edited by Pigeon Army -- 2/12/2008 4:29:31 AM >


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rinc
She's supposed to be 13! I'd want her to be very attractive though


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pigeon Army
Stop being mean to Deviation

No.

(in reply to sam89)
Post #: 439
RE: Quantum of Solace - 2/12/2008 10:55:04 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1895
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
quote:

scenes however the first two hurt my head because of the way they were edited. The shaky camera didn't help. Neither did the choppy editing
quote:

ORIGINAL: max314

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreepyThinMan

It was exactly what I was expecting and that's a bad thing given how low my expectations were. Casino Royale was 2 ½ hours long. QoS is 90 minutes, has four times as much action as CR and, yet, feels completely unsubstantial. The movie is lacking any of the grace, charm or wit that CR had. I feel about this movie the way I did about The Incredible Hulk. Both are minor works and neither reach for anything more then disposable entertainment.

Bond wants revenge for the death of his bitch from the last movie and he hooks up with Camille (Olga Kurylenko) who is also looking for revenge on a minor character. Both Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini) and Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) are back with little to do apart from help Bond for a few minutes and add little or nothing to the overall plot. Both are good actors and they are wasted in this drivel. The woman who plays Camille is painfully generic. Daniel Craig and Dame Judi Dench are solid, as always, but that's because they are given the time to flesh out their characters in this movie. Mathieu Amalric (Munich, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) is the big bad of the movie and although he is a fantastic actor, the character he plays is soo under written that he spends most of the movie bugging his eyes out, acting like a creep and is a worthless villain.

People always mention how the Bourne films have been an influence on CR but I think it's important to note that the first Bourne film (The Bourne Identity) was Directed by Doug Liman who went for a classical style as opposed to the irritating shaky-cam style of Paul Geeengrass who made The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum. We should also remember that CR was Directed by Martin Campbell, who made Goldeneye and The Mask of Zorrow, both of which were very solid, well made movies. Campbell is also a classically styled Director who can get tough and gritty when he wants to but also cares about framing, compositing shots and has a very clean editing style.

The problem with QoS is that the action is near incoherent and has some of the worst editing I have ever seen in a major motion picture, one that reportedly cost 200 million, which recalls the worst moments of Greesgrass's Bourne films! When it was announced that Marc Foster was going to Direct I had my suspicions about what they were doing because Foster has ZERO track record in this genre. Now my suspicions have been confirmed.

Foster was hired to get the "dramatic” footage while the stunt and FX units shoot the other 75% of the movie. This has been the MO of Producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson for a long time. I've always wondered why they have never tried to tap top Directors for this series but I realize that it's because they don't want innovation, they want to push product and keep making the same shit they have been for decades, trust me, we will get more of this while CR will be seen as a blip of quality on an otherwise downhill trajectory into Shit City.

Casino Royale was the closest in spirit to Ian Fleming's original work and I had hoped that the Producers might have started re-adapting the rest of his novels but since Broccoli and Wilson keep hiring the same hacks that wrote The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day, I can only surmise that it's only a matter of time until the childish stupidity of the previous Bond movies starts to creep back in which is a shame since I think that Craig is the best Bond and I would have liked to have seen him star in a series of quality and distinction.  



I agree with you that The Bourne Identity was far, far superior to either of the Greengrass sequels, and I also agree that the latter's "style" is remarkably lazy, annoying and ultimately renders some pretty incoherent action scenes, thus making $150 look like $1.50.

Lame shit.

However, the action scenes in Quantum of Solance don't descend into that same incomprehensibility.  It holds longer on the key shots and the erratic movements are only used to heighten the sense of violence instead of dampening it with an ill-placed cut.

Furthermore, whereas Casino Royale's action scenes were almost useless from a narrative standpoint (a big, gimmicky parkour chase and some Rambo-esque shooty-explody stuff from a protagonist we have no reason to care about, leading to little more than finding the name "Ellipses" is utterly shameful from a writer's perspective), pretty much every action scene in Quantum of Solace turned the story in some way (e.g. the Italian foot chase starts wth a bang - quite literally - as it's revealed that an MI6 agent is actually an operative from Mr. White's organisation, which both provides Bond with a lead on achieving his vengeful mission while also keeping the audience from ever feeling safe again).

Casino Royale doesn't really start until Bond meets Vesper.  That's where the second act should have started.  There's at least 30 minutes of material that could have been cut from that film, which would have left us with a much healthier 114 minute runtime.

By contrast, Quantum of Solace is tight as a motherfucker.  It may be loaded with action, but it actually turns the story instead of just being a pit stop until the next scene.




You may consider 'ellipsis' bad wrting, but bond's characterisation, over the course of CR and QOS travels an elliptical path, with bond the lover in one film and bond the monster in the other. All the facets of bond have been laid bare over the course of this elliptical journey that has ended with Bond having everyhing he needs now to be the iconic bond so many have bitched about the absence of in Craig's films thus far.

So obviously, I think 'ellipsis' is fucking brilliant writing, because the content of CR in this instance relates to the context, subtext, theme, character and the narrative techniques employed in telling the story of the character behind the icon.

Yup, fucking brilliant.

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 2/12/2008 10:58:36 AM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 440
RE: Quantum of Solace - 2/12/2008 11:25:56 AM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield
I watched QoS again the other night at home (yes, yes, naughty me for downloading a screener) and I have to say, even though I liked it the first time, it feels much better on the second viewing.  The action feels more coherent and easier to follow than it did on the big screen, especially during the car chase and boat chase. 

I've heard people complaining about the editing style and camerwork in QoS, it's similar to the critisicm of Nolan and the fight scenes in Batman Begins.  Watching Begins on the big screen was great, but yes some of the action was confusing and felt badly edited (yes, I know Nolan claims this was deliberate) but when I came to watch it at home on dvd, and even moreso on blu ray, everything made a lot more sense.  I could make out what was going on a lot easier, and it's the same here with QoS.  Maybe small screen viewings are the better way to go with these fast cut, shaky cam, bonkers edited action movies, eh? 

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 441
- 4/12/2008 12:00:34 AM   
yodaami

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 28/12/2006
I felt that too much of the action in the opening 20 minutes passed by so quickly that you barely had chance to make out what was happening. I cant understand why they spend so much money and time filming the scene to then edit it to a point where its a blur. The chase over the roof tops could have been on a par with the opening chase of CR especially with the tense ending, but left me wondering how the hell they ended up in that situation! Daniel Craig is a fantastic Bond though!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 442
RE: Quantum of Solace - 4/12/2008 12:06:39 AM   
yodaami

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 28/12/2006
whats with showing the gear changes in both bourne supremacy and quantum? its not the fast and the furious

(in reply to sam89)
Post #: 443
RE: Quantum of Solace - 4/12/2008 12:08:23 AM   
yodaami

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 28/12/2006
What's with showing the gear changes in both bourne supremacy and quantum? who cares what his feet are doing in the footwell?! its not the fast and the furious

(in reply to sam89)
Post #: 444
RE: Quantum of Solace - 5/12/2008 1:19:18 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

You may consider 'ellipsis' bad wrting, but bond's characterisation, over the course of CR and QOS travels an elliptical path, with bond the lover in one film and bond the monster in the other. All the facets of bond have been laid bare over the course of this elliptical journey that has ended with Bond having everyhing he needs now to be the iconic bond so many have bitched about the absence of in Craig's films thus far.

So obviously, I think 'ellipsis' is fucking brilliant writing, because the content of CR in this instance relates to the context, subtext, theme, character and the narrative techniques employed in telling the story of the character behind the icon.

Yup, fucking brilliant.


What?


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 445
RE: Quantum of Solace - 5/12/2008 1:19:57 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

You may consider 'ellipsis' bad wrting, but bond's characterisation, over the course of CR and QOS travels an elliptical path, with bond the lover in one film and bond the monster in the other. All the facets of bond have been laid bare over the course of this elliptical journey that has ended with Bond having everyhing he needs now to be the iconic bond so many have bitched about the absence of in Craig's films thus far.

So obviously, I think 'ellipsis' is fucking brilliant writing, because the content of CR in this instance relates to the context, subtext, theme, character and the narrative techniques employed in telling the story of the character behind the icon.

Yup, fucking brilliant.


What?


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 446
RE: Quantum of Solace - 5/12/2008 1:27:11 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

You may consider 'ellipsis' bad wrting, but bond's characterisation, over the course of CR and QOS travels an elliptical path, with bond the lover in one film and bond the monster in the other. All the facets of bond have been laid bare over the course of this elliptical journey that has ended with Bond having everyhing he needs now to be the iconic bond so many have bitched about the absence of in Craig's films thus far.

So obviously, I think 'ellipsis' is fucking brilliant writing, because the content of CR in this instance relates to the context, subtext, theme, character and the narrative techniques employed in telling the story of the character behind the icon.

Yup, fucking brilliant.


What?


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 447
RE: Quantum of Solace - 5/12/2008 1:28:11 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

You may consider 'ellipsis' bad wrting, but bond's characterisation, over the course of CR and QOS travels an elliptical path, with bond the lover in one film and bond the monster in the other. All the facets of bond have been laid bare over the course of this elliptical journey that has ended with Bond having everyhing he needs now to be the iconic bond so many have bitched about the absence of in Craig's films thus far.

So obviously, I think 'ellipsis' is fucking brilliant writing, because the content of CR in this instance relates to the context, subtext, theme, character and the narrative techniques employed in telling the story of the character behind the icon.

Yup, fucking brilliant.


What?


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 448
RE: Quantum of Solace - 5/12/2008 1:30:37 PM   
max314


Posts: 2773
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
Um, sorry...the forum just fucked up and repoduced my post several times making me sound like Stone Cold Steve Austin.

And why is there no edit option?


_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 449
RE: Quantum of Solace - 5/12/2008 2:34:27 PM   
Guchmeister

 

Posts: 321
Joined: 28/11/2007
quote:

ORIGINAL: max314

Um, sorry...the forum just fucked up and repoduced my post several times making me sound like Stone Cold Steve Austin.

And why is there no edit option?



What?  

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 450
Page:   <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Double agent question Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.157