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

123468

Comments

  • edited October 2012 Posts: 12,382
    @BAIN123 I agree. TNDs PTS isn't the best, notby a long shot, but I enjoy it much more than the QOS one. Somebody on here did a good re edit of the QOS PTS, it was good actually.
    Shardlake wrote:
    TND has a horrible PTS.

    What do you think is wrong with it, apart from the face Brosnan makes when the guy in the back seat is strangling him?
    Shardlake wrote:
    Yes thelivingroyale it is my opinion not fact, not that you aren't guilty of hammering home your opinion, people in glass houses eh?

    But I say when it's my opinion. And why are you trying to start an argument over some random comment I made on a different thread?
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    @BAIN123 I agree. TNDs PTS isn't the best, notby a long shot, but I enjoy it much more than the QOS one. Somebody on here did a good re edit of the QOS PTS, it was good actually.
    Shardlake wrote:
    TND has a horrible PTS.

    What do you think is wrong with it, apart from the face Brosnan makes when the guy in the back seat is strangling him?
    Shardlake wrote:
    Yes thelivingroyale it is my opinion not fact, not that you aren't guilty of hammering home your opinion, people in glass houses eh?

    But I say when it's my opinion. And why are you trying to start an argument over some random comment I made on a different thread?

    You accused me of stating my opinion was fact in this thread, take a look for yourself.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 12,382
    Oh right, sorry. I thought it was in the TWINE/DAD thread, since they've both been covering the same topics lately (Brosnans films).
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,175
    The presence of Judi Dench and Geoffrey Palmer alone makes the TND sequence more entertaining than the one in QoS.

    I say it again, they should have started QoS with Bond driving up to the underground base with Mr White in the boot.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,425
    The opening shot across the lake and the chase is quite good IMO. Not original but stylish and entertaining enough.

    The TND PTS is perhaps more entertaining. The only decent PTS of the Brosnan era IMO. Pain face aside.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,175
    Getafix wrote:
    The opening shot across the lake and the chase is quite good IMO. Not original but stylish and entertaining enough.

    True, as are the final shots of the car driving into the safehouse. But I still think the one in TND is a bit more enjoyable. It's in the old style of a mini film before the main feature to wet the appetite,

    My mum's reaction to the "pain face" - what's he meant to do? Smile :p

    I do like the final line by Brosnan: "White Night to White Rook...I've evacuated the area...ask the admiral where he'd like his bombs delivered". Delivered just right and Judi's smile is the icing on the cake.

    Also what about the shot of the planes flying one above the other? That was done for real and probably took a lot of careful co-ordination.
  • Zekidk wrote:
    "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"?

    I never said Bond needs to include only mature audience. And there is nothing wrong with kids wanting to be Bond. I wanted when I became a fan at the age of 15!

    All I wanted to say is, I don't want Bond to actively target kids. Flemings books and imo at least the first 2 Connery movies were surely not actively made for kids.
    So just because some kids don't want to be Bond, does not mean it is a bad thing! At least not quality-wise imo.
    However if we see the success of Batman or Bond, I don't see how we really have to worry about it.

    That lead to my argument btw, that it is refreshing to have different styles of Bond. It kept the franchise alive and moreover delivered a lot of different entertainment, which I mostly enjoy. I love Craig as Bond and think he is the best next to Connery with Dalton very close. But that doesn't mean that I can't enjoy Moore or Brosnan.
    In that sense however, I think Moore and Brosnan are probably more suitable for kids than Connery, Dalton and Craig. And you know what, my fifteen year old me probably would defend Brosnan as the best Bond ever!

    Really comes down to age and perspective I think. So for me now, I don't need Bond pandering to kids.
    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.

    I agree. Just wanted to point out: Bond films aren't made for kids (or should not imo) but that doesn't mean kids can't enjoy them!
    It's not about me wanting more violence or whatsoever in Bond to keep the kids away, just rather less stupid jokes and cartoon plots to force Bond into family entertainment.

    And I agree, it would get boring. Even if we had only Connery movies! If every Bond has done well...I will tell you when I rewatch OHMSS for the first time since I guess 8 years... ;-)
    Really want to give Laz another chance...

    Btw, TND PTS is solid and if it wasn't for the editing, QoS PTS would probably in my Top 5. I enjoy it as it is and think it's very exciting, but damn the editing...
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    The opening shot across the lake and the chase is quite good IMO. Not original but stylish and entertaining enough.

    True, as are the final shots of the car driving into the safehouse. But I still think the one in TND is a bit more enjoyable. It's in the old style of a mini film before the main feature to wet the appetite,

    My mum's reaction to the "pain face" - what's he meant to do? Smile :p

    I do like the final line by Brosnan: "White Night to White Rook...I've evacuated the area...ask the admiral where he'd like his bombs delivered". Delivered just right and Judi's smile is the icing on the cake.

    Also what about the shot of the planes flying one above the other? That was done for real and probably took a lot of careful co-ordination.

    Probably the best sequence in the entire Brozza era IMO.
  • Posts: 1,146
    I don't know what to say other than there's absolutely NO tension in the opening sequence in TND and plenty of it in QOS. It's not even close.

    The guy pops up from one plane to the other, lol.
  • Posts: 158
    A good James Bond movie should be like a good orgasm.
    The tension should build up and then there should be a series of climaxes.
    The biggest problem with QOS is there just wasn't enough climaxes.
    It was like making love and then stopping before you have fully reached orgasm.
    Very unsatisfying.
    Look at Casino Royale. It had the big orgasm and then we thought that was over it.
    But it kept on going, into Venice for another big climax.
    So Casino had a structure to it that left the audience with a smile of their faces.
    Quantum had writing that sucked big time!
    Marc Foster did a good job with what he had to work with.
    The artistic direction and the use of locations was stuuning.
    There was a grittiness to it and a different tone to other Bonds.
    He pushed the envelope a bit, and that was a daring move.
    A bad director can make a bad movie out of a good screenplay.
    But no director can make a good movie out of a bad screenplay, and that is what he had to deal with.
    So I give him the credit he deserves.
    If they had got the script nailed and given him even more freedom, I have no doubt he would have fully satisfied his audience with an orgasm they would never forget.
  • Perfect timing Mr BondBug. You couldn't make it up

    I disagree completely with the other response that the intro to Tomorrow Never Dies has no tension or seems lacklustre even. It's probably one reason why it's worth a watch, although there's nothing to stop the viewer simply turning off as soon as the quite outstanding Crow theme has finished, and Roger Spottiswoode puts his name to the work. It's far better than that awful, muddled, nauseating nonsense in Quantum Of Blair Witch. I couldn't even tell what was going on or who was who in that pre credits sequence

    "It's time to get out" - I almost wanted to 'get out' of my seat and vomit..

    I can only hope this years release will be a lot more steady to the nerves when we go to have a viewing

    This was supposed to be a discussion on Forster's work on the above movie but I see plenty of Brosnan talk creeping in to the sober arena and 'pain faces'. It appears discussions went off on a tangent somewhere along the line, but make no mistake about it, Quantum Of Solace did bring about a certain amount of 'pain face'. There can be no dispute

    And Forster can defend his work all he wants but it was simply a crap movie and overall poor and disappointing James Bond release

    Pretty simple math Mr Forster
  • I honestly think that QoS had one of the best PTS, I thoroughly enjoyed it and I think the editing style, cinematography and music were just perfect for this scene. It also has the Tosca scene ( which was Amazing) and I felt the emotion felt by bond was represented in every scene which was a good addition. I admit that sometimes the editing gets a little confusing during the Mr.Slade fight scene but overall QoS is definitely in my Top 10 Bond films.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,445
    sandn119 wrote:
    I honestly think that QoS had one of the best PTS, I thoroughly enjoyed it and I think the editing style, cinematography and music were just perfect for this scene.

    The best shot is when he dispatches the second Alfa. The beginning of it is ridiculous. I do quite like the fact it is snappy but it could have been done much better. Stripped back it's essentially just a car chase. Something like GE makes it look tame, even with Super-Bond.

  • Posts: 267
    Risico wrote:
    Quantum of Solace put James Bond in a pair of white jeans. I have little else I wish to contribute to this thread. In fact, I think I need a lie down...

    Fellow Agents,
    I think the great "Risico" has it nailed.
    You can't defend the indefensible. QOS was just "pants" and that's all there is to it!
    Regards,
    Bentley
  • Posts: 1,146
    Well the discussion at hand is whether Quatum of Solace is better than the last three Brosnan films, and the answer to me is, 'easily'.

    TND has that horrible scene where this American stage actor that I've seen in a million shows here in the US is supposed to torture Bond, and it just comes off so incredibly silly, almost a self-parody.

    I think there's some good potential in TND, but the tone is just all over the place and the story has absolutely no suspense to it.
  • Posts: 7,642
    I think there's some good potential in TND, but the tone is just all over the place and the story has absolutely no suspense to it.

    And if that would be the worst thing about QoB.......... But sadly enough it is a poor movie by EON standards and a shitty action movie when compared to other action movies of that year. With QoB the action quality of the 007 series was seriously tainted, even the much liked opening act was cut down from a three car chase to 2 car chase because it lasted too long in Forsters opinion. SO we get a severly damaged endproduct that makes little sense and is wasted.
    I agree that they should have started with 007 entering Sienna where they are going to question mr. White and followed by the footchase (being that a similar chase in the Bourne Supremacy vehicle was better and made more sense). The carchase was nothing special.

    For folks who like impressive carchases go and watch RONIN, they really did the best work that imho has not been surpassed since.
  • pjtpjt
    Posts: 18
    Story-wise I had the same feeling like after LTK, that is Bond killed a drug lord, and blew up his drug factory. And??? Who cares? Here he derailed a South American coup. Just to spite Mr White? Yawn. The other movie in the movie, the one about the Quantum organization is kinda cool, but by the end of the exploding hotel (why is it exploding exactly?) you just forget about it.
    Both movies have flawed action scenes, like the truck wheelie in LTK, and the awful 1 second cuts in QoS. At least the truck scene was supposed to be funny. But the QoS action scenes were just boring.
    You can just feel every unfinished scene, and dialog, and it doesn't even award you for it with some nice fights, chases or gadgets. Why exactly is it a Bond movie? Just because of the Quantum parts. The rest is just meh.

    And it being compared to TND. It was also mostly an action move but the concept of breaking out WW3 just to boost the number of readers is actually witty. And it had a gunbarrel and Q and Moneypenny and a great car chase with the remote control BMW.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,036
    [

    I like DAD better because I think the first half is great. There are only 3 problems with the first half: Jinx, the in your face references, and the theme song.

    What about the invisible car and the OTT fencing fight AND madonna as fencing coach?
  • Posts: 7,642
    [

    I like DAD better because I think the first half is great. There are only 3 problems with the first half: Jinx, the in your face references, and the theme song.

    What about the invisible car and the OTT fencing fight AND madonna as fencing coach?

    Should have watched Top Gears salute to the invisible car. ;)

    She was a bit more than 1 minute in the movie and her "acting" was not that bad to judge it really. She had a cameo due to her singing the titlesong, not a big deal. People that are really concerned about this little thing are really looking for faults that are not there. The madonna-cameo is not worth judging a movie on. Otherwise CR is a piece of shit due to the Branson-cameo?

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,731
    Forster can be a good director IMO. Monster's Ball has convinced me of that. I just don't see him as a particularly good action director. He seems to think that action is synonymous with frenetic cutting, distorting, shaking and blurring. However, action is about movement, about sensing the speed of something or other kinetic vibes. The Road Warrior, Terminator 2 and Raiders Of The Lost Ark, to name but a few, were all able to show action while the camera lingered on certain shots for more than five seconds. I don't think Forster has what it takes to produce such action thrills. Even in World War Z he gets things all fuzzy once the script has yelled action! His idea of action is cheep: cut things up and sew them together in the most jerky, loop-the-loop and up-and-down manner. Sorry Marc, actions works best if the background is left pretty much unaltered with objects in front of it speeding along. At least IMO.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,959
    @DarthDimi, I don't know what it was, but as soon as WWZ started and the initial outbreak began, I thought "Here we go, traditional Forster shaking and quick-cutting," but as the film went on, it didn't seem as bad to me.
  • Posts: 5,767
    DarthDimi wrote:
    The Road Warrior, Terminator 2 and Raiders Of The Lost Ark, to name but a few, were all able to show action while the camera lingered on certain shots for more than five seconds.
    While I sure wish for more of that stuff (is it naive to hope for a good new Mad Max movie?) I neither think anything else can´t work, nor that Forster´s action films are the new paradigm. But they are really watchable. IMHO.

    Creasy47 wrote:
    @DarthDimi, I don't know what it was, but as soon as WWZ started and the initial outbreak began, I thought "Here we go, traditional Forster shaking and quick-cutting," but as the film went on, it didn't seem as bad to me.
    Come on, you can´t be that ignorant. How can you speak of "traditional" when Forster has done merely two action films, after a number of non-action films? And where on earth is all that shaking? I watched the film two times, and that shaking just wouldn´t show up.

  • SharkShark Banned
    edited August 2013 Posts: 348
    There is a lot of handheld camera action in WWZ, just watch this clip:



    That said, the incoherence and jumpy rhythms mostly come from the editing. A ridiculous amount of coverage from different angles, tight close ups, lack of master shots etc. This is the opposite of Deakins's/Baird's approach on SF.

    Read David Bordwell's essay on what he calls "intensified continuity."

    http://academic.csuohio.edu/kneuendorf/frames/editing/Bordwell02.pdf
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    edited August 2013 Posts: 14,723
    I think that Forster is right to defend it. I know I do, too. It's very different as a Bond film and very interesting and worthy of study as a result. Bond films need to keep adapting and changing to keep things fresh and QoS is a perfect example of this, by way of its updating of Fleming's original vision of James Bond for a modern audience.
  • Posts: 686
    Dragonpol wrote:
    I think that Forster is right to defend it. I know I do, too. It's very diofferent as a Bond film and very interesting and worthy of study as a result. Bond films need to keep adapting and changing to keep things fresh and QoS is a perfect example of this, by way of its updating of Fleming's original vision of James Bond for a modern audience.

    I agree with you 100% that the Bond films need to adapt. Adaption is required of all of us to survive. However, I want to Bond films to continue the Fleming legacy and there are many things in the Fleming legacy that are timeless.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,959
    @boldfinger, it's traditional to me if that's how it's been for both of his action films. Perhaps not the proper usage of the word, then, but I am a pro-QoS fan, I don't trash it like many others. Sometimes the quick cutting wasn't bad.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,469
    The QOS PTS is very poorly edited in the beginning but as far I know there's a reason for it.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 16,351
    Machine gun editing I can handle, it's the shaky cam I can't. Although, if shaky cam is used extensively, fast editing can make it seem less shaky...
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited August 2013 Posts: 19,731
    chrisisall wrote:
    Machine gun editing I can handle, it's the shaky cam I can't. Although, if shaky cam is used extensively, fast editing can make it seem less shaky...

    Agreed, @chrisisall.

    I can handle shaky cam when used for a reason - and not too much of it. Take Saving Private Ryan. There's a lot of shaky stuff going on when the allied soldiers storm the beach. Makes sense if you think about it. The whole storming of those occupied beaches was madness. The shaky cam tells me that no matter how hard you try to grasp your surroundings and focus on your target, in the end you have bullets flashing past you - if you're lucky - and you just go. go! Go! Go! The shaky cam allows for a few moments of thrilling and chilling chaos, as it must have felt to those soldiers. But when two people talk, the camera is pretty much held stable. Compare this to what we see in for instance The Bourne Ultimatum. Good film, but why the hell must we witness a quiet conversation between two seated people with the camera going left - to - right, up - and - down, back - and - forth? What's the point? We're in a room in a house, not on a boat! Some people say that it enhances our involvement in the scene. Really! I see. Or better, I don't. For when I'm in a room overlooking a quiet conversation between two people, I'm neither spinning my head like a drunk or wiggling like a toddler in my chair.

    Fortunately, QOS can maintain a stable hand on the camera during conversations. It's the action that seems to require all this shaking. Anyone with a digital camera can take quick shots hand-held and randomly paste them together so that one creates the illusion of action. But an illusion, it is. Now, if we go back to the parcour sequence in CR. It's real, it's extensive and it blows us away. It's fast, agreed, but not at all as hyperkinetic as what we see in QOS. I can always tell whether it's Bond or Molaka we're watching and my sense of geography remains in tact. The QOS car chase? I can distinct between wheels and doors but don't ask me to point out whose car is in frame. Sienna? Heck, I don't even know why I'm constantly pulled out of the chase to watch horses, let alone figure out who's who on the roofs of Italy.

    And that, people, is NOT action. That's about as bad as when the first Saw film, due to budget restrictions, was forced to shoot Danny Glover 'racing' in a police car by having the car stand still and jerking the camera back and forth as in a drug induced frenzy. John Milius, William Friedkin, Peter Yates, ... these guys know how to film a car chase, how to do action. They make us part of the action itself, not of the disorienting side effects. Even John Glen and some of his second unit directors brought better acting skills to the table, IMO, when they directed Moore and Dalton in the Bonds.
  • Posts: 1,548
    Very underrated film IMO. Give me QOS ahead of Roger Moore in a safari or clown suit
    any day!
Sign In or Register to comment.