It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Maybe @RC7 can enlighten us a bit?
Low budget? QoS oozes production value in almost every frame!
Your thoughts mirror mine exactly.
I guess SP just seems to have a bit more class and glamour. Thrashing supercars past the Vatican beats a drudge through third world shanty towns.
I take your points on QOS - it looks glorious in blu ray on a 60 inch screen - but there's just something about the locations that seems a bit cheap.
It's difficult to explain but I guess for some reason I'm just never that blown away when Bond ventures to the Americas.
well, yeah, right...
https://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/jamesbond/images/2/2b/Quantum_of_Solace_-_Mathis_thrown_in_a_dumpster.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/343?cb=20130410110138
The man was a loose canon in there. Even more loose than Dalton's Bond in LTK.
I'm with you @Mathis1 - QoS, whatever one has to say about the film, is one fine and crisp looking picture.
Regarding Rome and so on, sure these are glamorous spots, but I wouldn't say that the film made the best use of these locales. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that John Wick 2 did a far better job with making us feel the atmosphere of Rome, at least for me.
So while the locales were certainly fancier & more expensive in SP, I felt that QoS did a better job with what they had to work with.
@TheWizardOfIce, I think that's just the nature of the locations picked. We really see the locations in the dirt, and not very glamorous. In Italy we don't see the art or culture, it's Bond fending for his life on the rickety rooftops as tiles cobble to crumbs under his feet, or where he gets mucky and wet in the cisterns below the city. Later locations, like Haiti and Bolivia, are also those we see out of their best lights, as communities impoverished are come upon by Bond. It's an examination of third world pain visually expressed, like in the shots of kids racing for water that won't come out of the tap, as opposed to those locations having just a visual appeal. How they're shot and why connects more to the story and Green's plans to monetize/control a valuable resource that is a human privilege rather than to function simply as beautiful imagery.
Maybe not everyone's cup of tea, but I appreciate how the locations are used on that deeper, more relevant level. Not every Bond film should have pretty locations, and those that don't, like From Russia with Love's spooky and faded Turkey, have their own appeal as mood setting locations.
Agree
Also the explosive climax in the desert is so much better than the half assed Morocco segment, although compared to the London 2nd climax it doesn't look too bad.
Yes QOS does have the editing issue but I only find it a problem in the foot chase and I don't like the boat chase much, the dog fight sequence is quite serviceable but it's made worse with the dreadful sinkhole sequence.
That being said apart from the Mexico PTS nothing else in SP can hold a candle to it. Love the PTS and best car chase of the Craig era, the dialogue is better.
As for sacrilege QOS has the ill advised GF tribute but after that I can't see anything bar the sinkhole bit that is on the level with the crimes committed in SPECTRE.
I heard someone say that EON rightly ignored it, well I'll disagree with that if anything SPECTRE gave QOS more validity and ironically for me at least makes QOS a better film.
No it doesn't really work without CR and for me all functions better watched straight after watching CR but I know I have no desire to watch SP after feasting my eyes on the far superior SF.
@Mendes4Lyfe mentions that the praising of CR is almost ignoring it's mistakes.
I would agree as much as it's no. 2 after OHMSS in my rankings CR does not get it right like Majesty's seems to, even Lazenby is good enough to make me not see that as minus.
Although CR has some questionable dialogue moments, ( we all know the ones) also the ham fisted product placement which almost brings one of the best Bond & Bond girl sequences to a crashing halt and the Miami sequence while entertaining is rather generic and then Arnold's taints it more with that awful Austin Powers moment when the Sky Plane is unveiled.
I do actually not find CR too long, (my Wife does and said so when we watched it) but I do see peoples POV on this.
That being said that CR gets so much right that it outweighs the bad and we get the best intro of a Bond since Connery sat at that casino table back 1962 and intoned that immortal words.
I love the sinking house sequence and the sign off his pure joy, this even getting into Eva, Gino and of course Mads, CR is one the milestones of the series.
Though QOS has more consistent dialogue and while the theme isn't on the level of YKMN (I do like it so sue me) but Arnold's score is definitely better, while I see QOS being reappraised over time I don't see SPECTRE in fact depending what happens next I can't see it improving over time at all.
Productions value are essentially about craft and technical skill. A film with high production values usually showcases that across the board. I find Gassner is working at higher level in SP when compared with QoS. Likewise the way Mendes structures and composes sequences is superior to Forster's work. A Mendes frame is considered, while a lot of Forster's is hit and hope, punctured by pseudo-arty cutaways or establishing shots. Hoyte is also a superior cinematographer. Between them they bring a richness and sweep to the picture. There's a grandiosity to the film that evokes TB. Another film with high production values. I don't dislike QoS' look, but colours popping is about preference (CR does that better for my money), production value is about the package and for me Mendes is better at delivering more class, style and richness through his design of the elements.
I wholeheartedly agree @RC7
I viewed TB last night, and I felt like I was inhabiting the locations there however. As if I was 'in the film'. I get that with TSWLM as well. QoS gives me that 'in the moment' feel too.
With SP, I feel as though I'm watching a stylized version of the location (more Sin City or Watchmen).
Imagine what could have been, If only he could make a good movie, whose story doesn't fall apart at the slightest touch or is boring as hell.
*sigh*
There are small brief moments where the film feels like a Bond film. However fleeting they might be, they are there. I can't say the same for SF.
@MajorDSmythe, we're to choose between SP and QoS, not SF. Though I don't think that'll change your vote anyway.
Opps, my mistake. I'd take SP over SF, and SF over QOS, so the outcome is still the same. Moreso really, given that it is up against QOS.
Anyway definitely QOS over SP in all areas.
QoS wins. More energy, more of Fleming's spirit (which is what Craig is best at), and the "good scenes" in it are better than those in SP. It can certainly feel flat at times but never as injurious to the series as SP. Craig's performance is just better. I still consider both of them among the weaker entries of the series but I'm in favour of QoS now.