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: Quantum of Solace

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Quantum of Solace Page: <<   < prev  13 14 15 [16] 17   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Quantum of Solace - 6/12/2008 9:46:23 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1891
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
quote:

ORIGINAL: max314

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?



An example of what I would say "What?" in response to:

Your comment "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)..."


The 'gimmicky' chase depicted a parkour expert being chased by someone clumsier who only caught him because of sheer determination and effort to find a way to overcome a better athlete by using his environment to his advantage. So it did serve a narrative purpose as well as getting to the heart of the bond character purely visually. And EVERYTHING leading to the finding of Ellipsis in some way showcases either the physical or cunning nature of the character.

Say "what?" one more time...I dare ya...

If you are the same Max who previously wrote almost novel length posts about the Matrix trilogy, I'd have expected you to be as on point regarding little nuances of character, theme, etc, visual storytelling, etc about other films, dude!

There's plenty of sophisticated stuff in CR, like Bond believing Vesper has no 'tell' in the poker terms the film describes. There is a single shot in the film where Vesper drops her mask of deceit for a split second and her face reveals she is seriously hurting behind the romantic chat, showing the audience her 'tell' and Bond doesn't see it, because he is looking the other way.

What?

Recently re-read this, my what a pretentious and sarcastic mother I must appear to anyone who doesn't know me






< Message edited by jobloffski -- 23/3/2009 1:03:54 PM >


_____________________________

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 #: 451
RE: Quantum of Solace - 6/12/2008 9:47:36 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1891
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
Double post

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 23/3/2009 1:08:41 PM >


_____________________________

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 jobloffski)
Post #: 452
Caotic and difficult to follow - 8/12/2008 12:36:05 PM   
rickybeed

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 6/10/2005
The film was caotic and difficult to follow. It was not a patch on the first 'Casino Royale' film. Wait until it come out free on TV and watch it then - it's not worth paying to see.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 453
RE: Caotic and difficult to follow - 11/12/2008 11:33:09 AM   
mightyhypnotoad

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 18/7/2008
Have to say that although I enjoyed this movie it could have been much better if it had just been ten minutes longer. That way the action sequences could have been slowed down enough so that we the viewers could actually percive what was going on. The shaky handheld  camera jump cut editing needs to be moderated. I've no doubt when I buy this on blu ray and slow it down it will look astounding but at the cinema it was a continual blur which gave me a bit of a headache. The pacing problems were my only major gripe with this movie and the interogation scene at the begining had a fantastic stand out line which showed that the terse humour displayed in Connory's movies still has a place in modern Bond. I know people are still whinging about gadgets or the lack there of and I know that I took a drubbing for my earlier posting stating my disdain for Moores era in the Tuxedo. However I stand by my decision that this is the right path for Bond to follow and the callous ruthless figure of a man first brought to screen by Connory is finally being restored to his rightfull glory.

"You've had your five and now I'll have my six"


_____________________________

"Hey, my girlfriend had one of those. Actually, it wasnít herís, it was her dadís. Actually, she wasnít my girlfriend, she just lived next door and never closed her curtains."

(in reply to rickybeed)
Post #: 454
RE: Caotic and difficult to follow - 11/12/2008 11:52:46 AM   
mightyhypnotoad

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 18/7/2008
Could have benifited from being ten minutes longer that way the action scenes could have been slowed down so that we could appreciate them. The shaky handheld cam + hyper jump cut editing needs to be moderated. No doubt this will look glorious on Blu ray when you can slow it down to perceptable speeds. Injections of terse humor shows that there is still a place for wit in Bond, the interogation scene early on in particular had a line that made me chuckle long after the credits had rolled. Craig was flawless as usual and this movie whilst not as breathtaking as CR because of the aforementioned pacing issue was still a highly enjoyable follow up, and reinforcement that Bond is definately moving in the right direction. Finally the callous unflinching figure of a man Connery first brought to the screen has been brought to redemption.

"You've had your five and now I'll have my six"


_____________________________

"Hey, my girlfriend had one of those. Actually, it wasnít herís, it was her dadís. Actually, she wasnít my girlfriend, she just lived next door and never closed her curtains."

(in reply to rickybeed)
Post #: 455
- 11/12/2008 6:00:01 PM   
MovieWatcher45

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 22/5/2008
It was OK but did the film have a plot? There was way too much action in the film and not enough story. Disappointing.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 456
RE: - 12/12/2008 9:25:57 PM   
MI Cruise


Posts: 3104
Joined: 12/12/2008
From: Shutter Island
Unfortunatly because Quantum had to tie up the loose ends of Casino, the movie was more drama than thriller, however what it lacks in story it makes up for in action.
After every 10-15 minutes you might see some high speed chase or some shooting here and there, it does make you forget about the rubbish plot, this movie perhaps may have been better if they hadnt continued it straight from Casino Royale but instead opted for a completely different story.
It may not be the best Bond movie everyone was expecting however it is at least better than previous installments (For Your Eyes Only, Die Another Day).
This movie has Daniel Craig on top form showing the audience that he can still fit into Bonds shoes and show us what he can do with them.

All in all an average Bond movie but a great time pass.

_____________________________

www.letterboxd.com/micruise1/films/

(in reply to MovieWatcher45)
Post #: 457
bad theme tune, villain and the confusing if any plot - 14/12/2008 9:56:37 AM   
THE DALTONATOR

 

Posts: 80
Joined: 17/2/2008
this film was a major dissapointment compared to casino royale that film had a good theme song, villain and plot as well as a sexy bond girl those are things all missing from this bounre and batman inspired action fest. Daniel craig is still brilliant and even if all the action is ripped off its still entertaining, i liked the idea of the quantum organization and continuing the plot onwards from casino royale but i didnt feel the emotion, anger or violence of hits bond and he was so upset about vesper he slept with another woman so it lost some feeling to me and some things didnt make sense, the villain and plot was grounded in real life was another interesting idea but neither didnt really stand-out which meant this film just fell into set piece after set piece. No interesting bond girls this time however this just continued the origin of bond and at the end of the film it is clear he has now made his full transformation if you played casino royale and qunatum of solace (weird unclear titel) back to back it would seem like one big film and that what this seems like the action filled less interesting second half of casino royale. Decent action flick but could have been better, still entertaining though and a respectable entry to the bond franchise. I am sure is this had followed die another day however it would look much better.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 458
RE: bad theme tune, villain and the confusing if any plot - 15/12/2008 12:03:41 PM   
somekindof_battery


Posts: 1608
Joined: 23/2/2008
I really felt about 25 minutes of character development and plot could have been added on to this film. Seems like it could have been there but was cut out for no reason. Enjoyable but not as good as Casino Royale (which to be fair is fine because few Bond films are)

_____________________________

"I can beat you, I don't need the girl hahah, I DON'T NEED THE GIRL! I don't need the gun John. I can beat you. I DON'T NEED NO GUN! AND I'LL KILL YOU NOW!" - Unknown 17th century poet

(in reply to THE DALTONATOR)
Post #: 459
- 23/12/2008 11:04:28 AM   
gepete80

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 31/8/2006
From: Tooting, SW London
There were 3 franchises being continued in the year 2008. With Indy flopping quicker then his hat, and the Caped Crusader stomping all over the competition that left a beaten, bruised and hurting Mr Bond to step up and be noticed, and with the disappearance of Harry Potter from this years movies, left it to sweep up the box office at the back end of the year. 4.9million in one day says it all.

Most of that 4.9 million comes from the outstanding job that was done by Casino Royale, which re-invented the franchise giving it a gritty and new angle from the decent job done by the Brosnan era (except Die Another Day, lets just forget that one…). Obviously the Bourne franchise had scared it into this re-invention but in finding Daniel Craig, the producers had got a Bourne beater.

One thing that could be levelled at Casino though was that in its set-up it could drag on slightly, especially during the card playing sequences. However it was balanced out by some corking action sequences which set it aside from any other Bond (even Bourne). Quantum of Solace at just over an 1hr and 45 dispenses with these slower sequences. There is no reason for them as we have already had the set-up in Casino. Being the first Bond direct sequel as well therefore the action starts straight of the bat, with a car chase bigger and better then anything been tried before.

However, where Casino might have been a bit slow in places, Quantum has slightly gone over the line in the other direction. The action is fast and furious taking hardly a second to breath, and regrettably, also takes no time to explain things. Plot wise the film is very loosely tied to Casino, and the reasons and thought processes behind the action are not particularly explained well enough. I found it sometimes difficult to understand the motivations behind the fistfights and shootouts, and it also encompasses a fairly frustrating ending where no answers seem to be forthcoming, in much an X Files type way.

This is still a brilliant movie, however. Craig stuffs the bad guys with panache, and with all the stunts involved it is amazing he didn’t end up with more then just an arm in a sling. Olga Kurylenko is very good Camille, not a typical Bond girl by any means and Mathieu Amalric has quite a menacing air to him as sheep clothed Green. However, it has to be said that Gemma Artertons role in the film was a tad disappointing. Her role to be honest was no more then decoration and in such was acted extremely poorly (including an accent from the Hermanie Granger school of Queens English).

However by the end you are left with an overriding sense that this was this Bond’s Empire Strikes moment, as you were left with more questions then you started with. There is a certain closure on the main arc of the movie but one thinks that Bond will need to be back, cos he still has some explaining to do.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 460
RE: Doesn't surpass Casino Royale, but is still pretty ... - 8/1/2009 11:14:11 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2506
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
A solid Bond adventure, lacking in spectacle but compensating in a smart, tight script and good acting and dialogue. Next time - a more charismatic villain with a more outrageous agenda, please.
Post #: 461
RE: Doesn't surpass Casino Royale, but is still pretty ... - 8/1/2009 11:47:30 PM   
DazDaMan


Posts: 10109
Joined: 8/9/2006
From: Penicuik - a right shithole
While I loved Casino Royale (saw it twice on the big screen), I came out of Quantum of Solace feeling a little.... cheated.

Maybe I'll have to sit down and watch it again, maybe there was something I missed that was quintessential to the plot, and therefore my enjoyment of it, but I just didn't enjoy it as much as Casino Royale!
 
I'm not saying I thought it was shit, I'm just saying that I didn't want to go back in and see it again....

_____________________________

You fucking fuckers are gonna do what I say or I'm going to stick my foot so far up your assholes you'll rue the day you crawled out of your mother's twat!

(in reply to bozo)
Post #: 462
RE: Doesn't surpass Casino Royale, but is still pretty ... - 9/1/2009 12:33:07 PM   
rupert303


Posts: 1737
Joined: 31/7/2008
From: A Big Geek Pie
just thought it was a whole load of nothing...neather good nor bad. Average in every respect

_____________________________

I see the dopeness. You only see the wackness.

www.rhum.org.uk

www.denofgeek.com

(in reply to DazDaMan)
Post #: 463
RE: Doesn't surpass Casino Royale, but is still pretty ... - 9/1/2009 12:34:18 PM   
rupert303


Posts: 1737
Joined: 31/7/2008
From: A Big Geek Pie
this movie was a whole load of nothing...neather good nor bad. Average in every respect

_____________________________

I see the dopeness. You only see the wackness.

www.rhum.org.uk

www.denofgeek.com

(in reply to DazDaMan)
Post #: 464
Disappointing - 10/1/2009 6:47:47 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18124
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
I had hoped that this film would make Casino Royale (a film which felt very much incomplete) a more rounded and satisfying experience. It failed in that respect. It also fails in many other respects. It seems that somewhere along the line they decided that for every potentially character building plot driven moment there had to be a frenetic action scene which was twice as long. Not necessarily a bad thing if the action is well handled but it was not. The lack of steadycam which worked quite well in Bourne grated in this film making it a chore to have to sit through the action. The camera seemed to shake overly much and the action was difficult to focus on, at the same time a lot the use of camera angles also made the film unsightly and clashed with the more composed shots of the plot driven moments. The acting whilst not outstanding was solid and again Craig presented a solid if touch stoic performance but at the same time the acting never stood out. An exceptionally mediocre film which does not linger in the mind and seemed to outstay its welcome even whilst watching it.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 465
RE: Disappointing - 16/1/2009 1:47:20 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1891
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
I'll say this:

QOS solace = The emotionally raging Bond who said 'Job's done. The Bitch is dead' burning through that defiant reaction to being emotionally destroyed, and surviving.

Clues in the credits: a man falls from a great height, hits the ground. Then gets up.

Better metaphorical content in Bond theses days than huge guns, planes and rockets, all of which sort of remain, but not so cartoony.

_____________________________

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 sanchia)
Post #: 466
RE: Disappointing - 16/1/2009 10:56:10 PM   
Emyr Thy King


Posts: 2177
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: The Grid
I enjoyed Quantum of Solace very much. I like Casino Royale, it is of course a very good film however it did have flaws, pacing and the length of the film being glaring ones. Yes with Quantum of Solace they have sacrificed some of the character driven scenes from Casino Royale, such as the scenes from the poker game, but this is counterbalanced by the raw, kinetic force of the action scenes. Yes there is country hopping but at least the film is different from the first, I believe the point of each film is to stamp its own mark and no lazily copy from the previous film. To me the opening car chase scene is stunning, especially with the strings gradually building up, with quick shots of the Aston Martin and Alfa Romeos, then the crescendo and away the film goes. I also think the Tosca opera scene is sublime, the staredown between Bond and Mr. Greene, the surreal music courtesy of the track Night at the Opera and the silen gun battle afterwards, great stuff. I certainly enjoyed Quantum of Solace more than Casino Royale, the latter to me felt like an entrťe.There will be more sequels to come, of course they will be delving further in Quantum and Bond himself. Bond is supposed to mature and refine himself the more the series goes on, I feel the more Daniel Craig led Bond films we'll see, the better his character will be and the more interesting the films will become.

_____________________________

"This whole imbroglio is epiphenomenal"...."demigogic faux egalitarianism" - Will Self

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 467
RE: Quantum of Solace - 22/1/2009 5:16:57 PM   
Worldz

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 22/1/2009
more like Quantum of bollocks

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 468
WHAT A FUCKIN LETDOWN - 5/2/2009 3:08:01 AM   
WiseGuy101

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 4/2/2009
4 STARS? THAT'S A BIT GENEROUS FOR A FILM THAT LACKED EVERYTHING THAT CASINO ROYALE HAD; A GREAT FEASIBLE PLOT, PLENTY OF ACTION SCENES AND A BOND GIRL THAT DIDN'T ANNOY THE CRAP OUT OF ME!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 469
Boring to be honest - 23/3/2009 8:12:43 AM   
jcallan

 

Posts: 94
Joined: 26/9/2006
bond sequel in average shocker

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 470
RE: Boring to be honest - 23/3/2009 11:11:55 AM   
Y2Neildotcom


Posts: 924
Joined: 29/9/2006
From: Worcester
quote:

His nameís Craig, Daniel Craig and heís back for his second outing as James Bond in Quantum of Solace, one of the strangest names for a Bond film that sparked many scratched heads when it was first revealed. This is a direct sequel to 2006ís Casino Royale yet loses something that itís predecessor had.

After the reboot Casino Royale gave the Bond franchise it should have been easy to Solace to follow, the footsteps were already there it was merely a matter of tracing them. How then did Bond go so wrong, in a direct sequel none the less? There is no doubt that the action sequences are incredible, but thanks to Bourne-style camera work and editing we barely get a glimpse of it. The opening car chase is a perfect example of this, each shot lasting a split second before being rammed with another itís nearly impossible to see what is actually going on.


You can read my full review here: http://y2neil.com/reviews/review.php?id=34

_____________________________

| www.y2neil.com |

"You kill or you die. Or you die then you kill".

"Your B.F's about to get F'd in the B!"

(in reply to jcallan)
Post #: 471
RE: Boring to be honest - 23/3/2009 12:30:54 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1891
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
Liked it first time, like it now. Still think it's a more sophisticated film than many others do, with such little details as bond using an object then throwing it away once its served its purpose repeated throughout the film, building up to him leaving Vesper's necklace lying in the snow.

Love the camerawork, which for all its Bourneisms at times also reflects the fractured state of Bond's mind (in that opening chase you see glimpses of parts of his face amongst the chaos, his eyes reflected in the rear view mirror, etc before you see his face, not unemotional, but falling apart on the inside, masking this with coldness the way men do all the time). Love the locations, particularly the desert, reflecting the wasteland inside Bond's soul at that point, going (almost literally) through the fires of hell and finding a way out when he was in danger of being lost forever.

That, for me is what this film is really, and deliberately about. Anyone expecting the usual malarkey will still be disappointed by the film, because they perhaps want to see a Bond they can fantasise about being whereas CR and QOS have been squarely focused upon what Bond is, under the charm. And what he is, is someone who will not stop, ever, until he has got to where/who he is trying to get to, no matter who or what gets in his way. Take the quips away and such a character aint pretty. And quips would have been totally inappropriate for Bond in this film which is obviously why they are absent.

He has now (sort of) declared his emotions and his heart useless to him, and in throwing away Vesper's necklace (at a cold location, again reflecting Bond's state of mind at the time) has signalled an intention never to let love get in the way of his duty ever again.

It's what Fleming may well have wanted, because the fear of ever falling in love again and the consequences for those he loves when he does fall for them are as much a part of his Bond as all the glamorious locations and bad guy confrontations are. It was brave of Ms Broccoli to allow the films to take the direction they have, and now that this has happened the sky truly is the limit for future Bond films.

The series can be brave enough to commit itself fully to an enjoyable romp or a serious story, instead of trying to shoehorn both comedy and seriousness into every film, every time. Every film can now be its own beast, instead of being an almost committee decided rewrite of 'the things people expect from a Bond Film'.

For the record, the 'From Russia with Love' novel doesn't even have Bond in it for about the first hundred pages, imagine how mental Bond Movie Fans would go if a film tried to be that faithful to Fleming!

And even those who don't rate, or even those who vociferously hate the latest Bond film will eventually have it to thank for setting the series free from it's past (via a story that depicts an almost destroyed 007 doing exactly the same thing, setting himself free from his past, ie Vesper).

Damn, I wish I got paid for saying stuff like this

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 23/3/2009 1:15:45 PM >


_____________________________

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 Y2Neildotcom)
Post #: 472
RE: Boring to be honest - 24/3/2009 1:43:55 AM   
ALS

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 25/7/2007
"...reflecting the wasteland inside Bond`s soul..."

Haha - brilliant...

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 473
RE: Boring to be honest - 27/3/2009 12:34:18 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1891
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
Anybody else think Q branch will be presented to us as a unit specifically to counter the omnipresent Quantum? A throwaway line it might have been, but Mr Green has already spilled his guts to Bond about the organisation, so a leap forward in the story situation is guaranteed next time.

And anybody else want to see Mr White get what's coming to him? 

Go on Barbara Broccoli, finish it with something like this:

Mr White: All this...All this chaos!! For a woman? For Vesper?

Bond: No. This is for me.

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 27/3/2009 12:59:12 PM >


_____________________________

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 ALS)
Post #: 474
RE: Boring to be honest - 27/3/2009 1:24:23 PM   
broonie

 

Posts: 866
Joined: 30/9/2005
After Casino Royale (one of the best Bond films IMO), I have to say that QOS was a bit of a disappoinment. The film seemed to be just mashed together, and thought the Dominic Greene character was a pretty weak villain. Gemma Arterton cant act for toffee (IMO) even with what little she had to do. Rubbish storyline and is it just me but I was sick of hearing about Vesper by the end of it. Overall one of the poorest Bond films sadly. Need more action and more girls and lets start weaning in some gadgets, yeah? This is Bond, not Bourne.

_____________________________

Do you want to run this ship?
Yes!
Well,...you cant!

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 475
Empire is wrong - 29/3/2009 12:25:44 PM   
Predalien

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 19/2/2009
From: Northern Ireland
IM strungling to give this 3 stars. As other eviewers have stated, After Casino royale this was an enormous let down and major disappointment. The deirector must have watched all the bourne films the night before the first day on set and decided to copy bourne. I mean how could he get it wrong(sarcasm). The result is therefore embarassing. I know casino royale had taken several liberties with the tradiotional bond template but this throws them ALL out of the window so we are left with an ultimately weak villian, bourne likeness that is plain embarassing and a mish mash of action scenes. Dont get me wrong some of them are good but the director relied on them too much.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 476
Actually... - 29/3/2009 7:20:20 PM   
littlechris

 

Posts: 17
Joined: 7/8/2007
Just watched this again last night, and while I still didn't meet my expectations, it is still a very good Bond film. Maybe it's because I watched it having watched Goldfinger, Living Daylights and Tomorrow Never Dies before hand, but it is one of the best filmed Bonds ever, and works on many levels. If you view it as a companion piece to Casino Royale it is very good and quite clever in many respects. Very much like one of Flemmings short stories. I think in time this will be seen as one of the most underrated Bonds of all time!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 477
Decent, but just that - 9/4/2009 1:39:09 PM   
StreetGangster

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 9/4/2009
After Casino Royale, i went to this 'sequal' expecting to see a great movie that lived up to it's original. But i have to say, it wasn't GREAT, the camera work wasn't good, it was shakey, the acting was good, but not great, and the whole way it was wrote, i just don't think it was a great film.
BUT, definatly one to see if you're a bond fan.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 478
Decent, but just that - 9/4/2009 1:39:11 PM   
StreetGangster

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 9/4/2009
After Casino Royale, i went to this 'sequal' expecting to see a great movie that lived up to it's original. But i have to say, it wasn't GREAT, the camera work wasn't good, it was shakey, the acting was good, but not great, and the whole way it was wrote, i just don't think it was a great film.
BUT, definatly one to see if you're a bond fan.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 479
Alright aye... - 10/4/2009 10:09:22 PM   
TheWitherall

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 20/3/2009
Benefits from being shorter aye, and a few shots in particular are crackin, fair play. but I reckon we need some bigger villians. Clive Owen or Damien Lewis maybe?

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 480
Page:   <<   < prev  13 14 15 [16] 17   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Quantum of Solace 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

0.391