Marc Forster still defending his work on 'Quantum of Solace'

123578

Comments

  • Risico007 wrote:
    NicNac wrote:
    Personal taste eh? Where would we be without it.

    I've read that QOS is a great Bond film
    QOS is the worst Bond film
    QOS is 'easilly' the second worst Bond film since Dalton.

    And every one written as if it's the generally accepted opinion. :-O


    after reading this thread is it any wonder why I genuinely refer to myself as one of the 8 people who liked Quantum of Solace.

    I love QoS. Hated it at the cinema when I couldn't follow the plot or the action scenes, but after several viewings I can now follow both. The editing and cinematography is wonderful. I consider QoS a true modern successor to the Terrence Young style. Better than any of the Brosnan movies.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Risico007 wrote:
    NicNac wrote:
    Personal taste eh? Where would we be without it.

    I've read that QOS is a great Bond film
    QOS is the worst Bond film
    QOS is 'easilly' the second worst Bond film since Dalton.

    And every one written as if it's the generally accepted opinion. :-O


    after reading this thread is it any wonder why I genuinely refer to myself as one of the 8 people who liked Quantum of Solace.

    I love QoS. Hated it at the cinema when I couldn't follow the plot or the action scenes, but after several viewings I can now follow both. The editing and cinematography is wonderful. I consider QoS a true modern successor to the Terrence Young style. Better than any of the Brosnan movies.

    I think it's better than many on here make out.
  • I think CR and QoS are the best Bond movies since For Your Eyes Only. And I do like all the movies in between, I even find DAD tolerable.
  • Many of the style decisions in QoS are taken directly from earlier Bond movies. The intercutting of the chase with the horse race is clearly inspired by the scene in OHMSS where Bond meets Tracy and Draco during a bullfight.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    The only reason that the Brosnan films have some sort of nostalgia is that they have all the tick the box moments to saturation point, it looks like a Bond film it might sound like a Bond film but for me it doesn't feel like a Bond film.

    If you'd made those films without the gadgets, the Bond theme and all the cliches established from GF onwards you'd have 3 generic 90's action movies with some transatlantic drawling smug playboy using a machine allot and one god awful C.G.I soaked pile of noughties bollocks, DAD is damned as soon as that gun barrel.

    If QOS had been soaked in the Bond cliches and had the JB theme all over it would be a different case, for me I'll take Craig playing Bond in a flawed entry but one that doesn't smash me over the head with elements to convince me I'm watching a Bond film, pretty much what every Brosnan film was from TND onwards.

    Brosnan films couldn't stand up on their own they needed everything but the kitchen sink to convince you it was a Bond film you were watching, remove them and it would be a different story, Craig convinces on performance alone, Brosnan would never be able to do that, anyway Skyfall will shut all this nonsense up about Craig not being Bond enough, CR made Brosnan era look ridiculous,SF is going to make it look obsolete.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Well said.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    @shardlake went in hard.

    Well said.
  • I find it funny how calling Brosnan a "transatlantic drawling smug playboy" is allowed but somebody called Craig ugly on a thread today and he was met with a massive sh*tstorm followed by that thread being closed.
    Shardlake wrote:
    If you'd made those films without the gadgets, the Bond theme and all the cliches established from GF onwards you'd have 3 generic 90's action movies

    I think the sort of the same about QOS. Take out M, etc, and rename the Bond character and for most of it you're left with a generic noughties action film.
    Shardlake wrote:
    Brosnan films couldn't stand up on their own they needed everything but the kitchen sink to convince you it was a Bond film you were watching, remove them and it would be a different story, Craig convinces on performance alone, Brosnan would never be able to do that, anyway Skyfall will shut all this nonsense up about Craig not being Bond enough, CR made Brosnan era look ridiculous,SF is going to make it look obsolete.

    Stop talking about your opinion like it's a fact. EG

    "CR made Brosnan era look ridiculous"

    No, you think it did.
  • I do agree with everything you said there @shardlake. Especially this bit:

    "CR made Brosnan era look ridiculous,SF is going to make it look obsolete."

    For me at least, this most certainly seems to be the case.
  • Posts: 3,037
    Shardlake wrote:
    The only reason that the Brosnan films have some sort of nostalgia is that they have all the tick the box moments to saturation point, it looks like a Bond film it might sound like a Bond film but for me it doesn't feel like a Bond film.
    Funny, that's exactly what I think of QoS, which is basically Bourne-on-speed.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 73
    Brosnan's era is out of fashion at the moment. More believable, gritty action is in vogue. I personally do think the Craig era is superior to the Brosnan one - I think they are simply better films - but you have to look at the Brosnan movies in context. The Brosnan movies were made for the widest possible audience to re-establish Bond as a movie franchise. They were huge, they didn't take a lot of risks, and they gave people what they expected to see in spades.

    With the Craig movies, Eon know they have an audience, and they also have a very capable actor, so they have room to experiment, top go deeper into character.

    Once the current style of 'realism' has gone and the next trend in movie making has arrived, people will look at the Craig films differently. The Bond series has constantly varied between more fantastical (Dr No, YOLT, LaLD, TSWLM, MR, DAD) and more down-to-earth (FRWL, OHMSS, FYEO, TLD, LTK, CR, QoS).
  • Posts: 3,037
    Brosnan's era is out of fashion at the moment. More believable, gritty action is in vogue.
    And with all this "gritty, believable action" I understand why no kids today want to be either Batman or Bond, unlike earlier. Can't blame them. Today's hero has to deal with personal issues, inner demons, a troubled past, etc. Just being cool and suave doesn't cut it.
  • Zekidk wrote:
    Brosnan's era is out of fashion at the moment. More believable, gritty action is in vogue.
    And with all this "gritty, believable action" I understand why no kids today want to be either Batman or Bond, unlike earlier. Can't blame them. Today's hero has to deal with personal issues, inner demons, a troubled past, etc. Just being cool and suave doesn't cut it.

    Interesting...how did you find time to talk to every kid in the world?

    Seriously, I've heard several boys from ages 12 to...well, being full grown men enthusiastically talking about how cool Craig's Bond is. This ranges from young relatives to kids in a mall or movie theatre or even on the subway! So Bond is still relevant, and across many ages and types of boys.

    If you don't think that Bond is cool and suave in recent films then I think we must have watched different movies...

  • Posts: 8,683


    this is my favorite scene in any bond film!
  • Posts: 3,037
    Zekidk wrote:
    Brosnan's era is out of fashion at the moment. More believable, gritty action is in vogue.
    And with all this "gritty, believable action" I understand why no kids today want to be either Batman or Bond, unlike earlier. Can't blame them. Today's hero has to deal with personal issues, inner demons, a troubled past, etc. Just being cool and suave doesn't cut it.

    Interesting...how did you find time to talk to every kid in the world?
    What I am saying is this: when I was 10-13 years old, everyone at school at the same age wanted to be like James Bond.

    Today I am a teacher and none of the kids want to be like him. Of course I have no idea if kids in Guetemala, Guam or Greenland feel the same way. [/quote]
    If you don't think that Bond is cool and suave in recent films then I think we must have watched different movies...
    Actually I don't think he is as cool and sophisticated as lets say Connery's Bond. And he is not meant to, either. Remember the recent films are reboots.
  • Actually, I don't really need kids wanting to be Bond...
    Moore and Brosnan actively included kids in their audience, yes...but was Bond really meant for kids?
    One thing I really liked about the EON documentary was Daltons statement about his darker style, something along the lines: "People were confused, they could not take their kids anymore to watch Bond. But it was never meant to be for kids!"

    Still, I was introduced to the series via Brosnan, and just like I think QoS is underrated, I think people are overly harsh to Brosnan. I prefer Connery, Dalton and Craig, but Moore and Brosnan made some highly entertaining movies and did, for their respective time, a good job and not only kept the series alive, but kept making it more and more successful.
    Without Brosnan we might not have gotten Craig or any other Bond film! Just as well, no Dalton if there wasn't Moore carrying Bond through the 70s and partly through the 80s.
    There are many different styles and takes on the character, but that has not to be a bad thing.
    I just watched Dr. No, FRWML and Goldfinger. It is shocking how different Goldfinger feels to FRWL and while I prefer FRWL, I was hugely entertained by GF and love it almost just as much.
  • Posts: 3,037
    "People were confused, they could not take their kids anymore to watch Bond. But it was never meant to be for kids!"
    Ask every Bond fan here: At what age did you become a fan?
    My guess is, that most would answer before the age of 20 (I recall a thread somewhere).

    Why do you think that is? And what would happen if the Bond series go all "mature audiences only"?
  • Actually, I don't really need kids wanting to be Bond...
    Moore and Brosnan actively included kids in their audience, yes...but was Bond really meant for kids?
    One thing I really liked about the EON documentary was Daltons statement about his darker style, something along the lines: "People were confused, they could not take their kids anymore to watch Bond. But it was never meant to be for kids!"

    When I was a kid I saw TLD at the cinema, and I wanted to be Dalton. Some of my mates thought he was the best Bond too. I think kids can go to every Bond film except maybe LTK.

    And that's a good thing. If Bond was for adults only we'd lose tons of future fans and the series might not be as successful.
    There are many different styles and takes on the character, but that has not to be a bad thing.

    Thank you! I love Dalton but if every Bond was like Dalton or Craig it'd get boring. I think every Bond has done well.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,057
    I first saw GoldenEye when I was 4 or 5. :p
  • Posts: 11,425
    Murdock wrote:
    I first saw GoldenEye when I was 4 or 5. :p

    That's just cruel. At any age.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,057
    Getafix wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    I first saw GoldenEye when I was 4 or 5. :p

    That's just cruel. At any age.

    Not for me, It was a wonderful life changing introduction to James Bond. Golden has been ans always be my most favorite James Bond film. :D


    Respect!
    \m/
  • Posts: 11,425
    Murdock wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    I first saw GoldenEye when I was 4 or 5. :p

    That's just cruel. At any age.

    Not for me, It was a wonderful life changing introduction to James Bond. Golden has been ans always be my most favorite James Bond film. :D


    Respect!
    \m/

    Yep. Music still sounds as awful as ever. It takes real talent to make the Bond theme sound that naff.
  • Posts: 1,146
    Again, how is QOS not better than the last three awful Brosnan films?
  • Again, how is QOS not better than the last three awful Brosnan films?

    TND is great fun. Loads of good action, Wai Lin, Brosnan quite menacing (and noticably a bit more muscular than in his other movies), the martini shots scene, the remote control car chase, the bike chase, Teri Hatcher....
  • Posts: 11,425
    I see TND as a lesser version of QoS - visually quite stylish and the only Bond movie to come close to capturing something of the 90s (GE felt VERY 80s still). It is sustained more by it's frenetic pacing than a quality script or story, but it has some decent scenes (and a good PTS) and is far and away the best Brosnan film. Had they cast Monica B in the Paris role, give it a better ending and made the KD Lang song the main title track I think it could have been really rather good.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,425
    Double post

  • Posts: 1,146
    Again, how is QOS not better than the last three awful Brosnan films?

    TND is great fun. Loads of good action, Wai Lin, Brosnan quite menacing (and noticably a bit more muscular than in his other movies), the martini shots scene, the remote control car chase, the bike chase, Teri Hatcher....

    Okay, compare the actions sequences in those two pictures. It's not even close.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 12,382
    Okay, compare the actions sequences in those two pictures. It's not even close.

    You're serious?

    I think the halo jump in TND beats any action scene in QOS. There's also the PTS, the car chase, etc.

    All the action in QOS was ruined by the shaky cam/editing.

    Both films have a bit too much action imo, but at least in TND you can follow the action.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Not one scene any of the Brosnan films is as classy as the Bregenz sequence in QOS, a witty moment from Craig (very Connery) and then a touch of Coppolla & De Palma from Forster, also Iove that PTS it's one of my favourites, pity none of the other action sequence are as good.

    TND has a horrible PTS.

    Yes thelivingroyale it is my opinion not fact, not that you aren't guilty of hammering home your opinion, people in glass houses eh?
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,175
    Never been a fan of the PTS in QoS. There's no suspence and it's just all out action with NO break in the camerawork. At least the one in TND set up a suspensful situation prior to the action beginning.

    And why did they include two action scenes in under 10 minutes? Personally I think they should have gone with the second action scene in the PTS (i.e. the interrogation and chase with Slate) and end it with Bond firing at the camera, killing the trecherous agent - that would have been a good way to lead into the opening credits (they would have needed to slow down the camerawork in that scene too but hey ho).

    The one in TND is flawed but I've always found the moment just before the jet leaves the runway exillerating, Brosnan's face, David Arnold's music, the editing when the plane actually takes off - all nicely done.

    Its a bit too reliant on action but would I take it over the PTS in QoS? Yes I think I would (and I say that as someone who now ranks TND in the lower half).
Sign In or Register to comment.