What went wrong with QUANTUM OF SOLACE?

12467

Comments

  • Posts: 1,394
    Brand new review of QOS.Pretty much sums up what went wrong with it.

  • Posts: 623
    I just watched his review of SPECTRE too, and he thinks the same as me on the Craig era.

    1 Classic
    2 Mess
    3 Great Fun
    4 Not quite as great fun, but still great fun

    Thanks for putting that video up.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    QUANTUM is excellent, I’m watching it now. If NTTD can even manage to scratch the belly of this one I’ll be ecstatic.

    It's second to last in my ranking, yet I find myself watching it more than any of Craig's other films. It's got such momentum, it doesn't waste a moment of its runtime.

    There's something horribly efficient about this film.

    It's one of the most re-watchable for sure. I think it's because it's flawed, the more you watch it the more you start to see past the flaws and the plot, characters, themes become more apparent. Also, great fights such as the Slate one.

    I watched the sequence in slow motion and to my eye it looks as though Craig does the entire stunt. I think there is one second around 0:56-0:57 portion where the stuntman comes in. But its a very innocuous moment and Craig does the heavy lifting....


    Craig did a lot of stunts for this one, more than most.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    QUANTUM is excellent, I’m watching it now. If NTTD can even manage to scratch the belly of this one I’ll be ecstatic.

    It's second to last in my ranking, yet I find myself watching it more than any of Craig's other films. It's got such momentum, it doesn't waste a moment of its runtime.

    There's something horribly efficient about this film.

    It's one of the most re-watchable for sure. I think it's because it's flawed, the more you watch it the more you start to see past the flaws and the plot, characters, themes become more apparent. Also, great fights such as the Slate one.

    I watched the sequence in slow motion and to my eye it looks as though Craig does the entire stunt. I think there is one second around 0:56-0:57 portion where the stuntman comes in. But its a very innocuous moment and Craig does the heavy lifting....


    The problem for me is that beyond the flaws there is still very little. It has some very, very good moments but they’re few and far between. And unlike some of the other more maligned entries, DAF, TMWTGG, AVTAK etc, it’s doesn’t have a distinct identity in the way those do. There’s an atmosphere and a style to those pictures that I find completely absent in QoS. Even the lauded cinematography feels all too ‘perfume ad’ for me because there’s just no weight to any of the scenes. I’d single out Tosca as an exception.
  • Posts: 3,279
    The main problem with QoS is the editing. First with the action itself. Opting for the Dan Bradley Bourne style just didn't seem to work within the constraints of a Bond film. CR fared much better in the way sequences like Madagascar was shot and cut together, and this is what audiences have come to expect in a Bond movie.

    And then the scissor-happy tight editing also becomes a problem with the film itself, not just the action. It is trimmed down way too much. Again, audiences have grown to expect a Bond film to breathe, to have those relaxed and slower moments. Unfortunately in QoS they are few and far between.

    Then the story. We know there was a writers strike which hindered the film, but there isn't much to grip the viewer. Its rather confusing in parts, and the direction doesn't help either. When we are not seeing frentic shaky cam action, we witness pretentious style-over-substance shots instead, in an attempt to turn Bond into arthouse cinema. When there isn't a very strong script to hold it all together, you can see why it loses its audience.

    Where QoS triumphs is first with the soundtrack (not the ghastly song). Arnold brings in arguably his best score, evoking retro cool John Barry circa 1971 in parts.

    And secondly the grittiness. Bond bleeds and gets battered here, following on from where we left off in CR. I'm all for seeing Bond like this (the only 2 times it has happened is in CR and LTK).

    This is where Mendes made his fatal mistakes for me in his direction of the 2 films he directed. We didn't see Bond bleed as much. And in SP we have that ridiculous spectacle of Bond springing to life and shooting all the bad guys after suffering a horrendous torture of drills inserted into his brain. In CR Bond recovers in hospital after having his balls whacked. Here, we are back in superhuman Brosnan territory again.

  • Agent_47Agent_47 Canada
    Posts: 330
    The main problem with QoS is the editing. First with the action itself. Opting for the Dan Bradley Bourne style just didn't seem to work within the constraints of a Bond film. CR fared much better in the way sequences like Madagascar was shot and cut together, and this is what audiences have come to expect in a Bond movie.

    And then the scissor-happy tight editing also becomes a problem with the film itself, not just the action. It is trimmed down way too much. Again, audiences have grown to expect a Bond film to breathe, to have those relaxed and slower moments. Unfortunately in QoS they are few and far between.

    Then the story. We know there was a writers strike which hindered the film, but there isn't much to grip the viewer. Its rather confusing in parts, and the direction doesn't help either. When we are not seeing frentic shaky cam action, we witness pretentious style-over-substance shots instead, in an attempt to turn Bond into arthouse cinema. When there isn't a very strong script to hold it all together, you can see why it loses its audience.

    Where QoS triumphs is first with the soundtrack (not the ghastly song). Arnold brings in arguably his best score, evoking retro cool John Barry circa 1971 in parts.

    And secondly the grittiness. Bond bleeds and gets battered here, following on from where we left off in CR. I'm all for seeing Bond like this (the only 2 times it has happened is in CR and LTK).

    This is where Mendes made his fatal mistakes for me in his direction of the 2 films he directed. We didn't see Bond bleed as much. And in SP we have that ridiculous spectacle of Bond springing to life and shooting all the bad guys after suffering a horrendous torture of drills inserted into his brain. In CR Bond recovers in hospital after having his balls whacked. Here, we are back in superhuman Brosnan territory again.

    "Brosnan territory" Oh, you mean Goldfinger through Die Another Day (Minus LTK) Don't pretend like the vast majority of these films are much different than Brosnan's era.
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    The main problem with QoS is the editing. First with the action itself. Opting for the Dan Bradley Bourne style just didn't seem to work within the constraints of a Bond film. CR fared much better in the way sequences like Madagascar was shot and cut together, and this is what audiences have come to expect in a Bond movie.

    And then the scissor-happy tight editing also becomes a problem with the film itself, not just the action. It is trimmed down way too much. Again, audiences have grown to expect a Bond film to breathe, to have those relaxed and slower moments. Unfortunately in QoS they are few and far between.

    Then the story. We know there was a writers strike which hindered the film, but there isn't much to grip the viewer. Its rather confusing in parts, and the direction doesn't help either. When we are not seeing frentic shaky cam action, we witness pretentious style-over-substance shots instead, in an attempt to turn Bond into arthouse cinema. When there isn't a very strong script to hold it all together, you can see why it loses its audience.

    Where QoS triumphs is first with the soundtrack (not the ghastly song). Arnold brings in arguably his best score, evoking retro cool John Barry circa 1971 in parts.

    And secondly the grittiness. Bond bleeds and gets battered here, following on from where we left off in CR. I'm all for seeing Bond like this (the only 2 times it has happened is in CR and LTK).

    This is where Mendes made his fatal mistakes for me in his direction of the 2 films he directed. We didn't see Bond bleed as much. And in SP we have that ridiculous spectacle of Bond springing to life and shooting all the bad guys after suffering a horrendous torture of drills inserted into his brain. In CR Bond recovers in hospital after having his balls whacked. Here, we are back in superhuman Brosnan territory again.

    "Brosnan territory" Oh, you mean Goldfinger through Die Another Day (Minus LTK) Don't pretend like the vast majority of these films are much different than Brosnan's era.

    In Thunderball we see Bond completely helpless in many moments such as being chased down by Fiona Volpe and Largo's men and the finale. He does actually bleed in that chase sequence from the fire in the car. In On Her Majesty's Secret Service there are multiple moments of Bond in dire straits such as Bond evading Blofeld's goons only to be saved by Tracy. In For Your Eyes Only we see Bond nearly killed by being dragged through the coral (he definitely bleeds in this scene) and climbing to St. Cyrils monastery. Sure, these aren't to the extend of Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace but nonetheless there have been moments were Bond has been wounded either physically or physiologically. The Brosnan era (perhaps with the exception of Goldeneye) sees Bond return to a gadget-wielding superman. The sequence where Bond finds the decoder and subsequent car chase in Tomorrow Never Dies has to be one of the most guilty in Bond history when it comes to this, IMO. I think the Mendes duo, but in particular Spectre is that there were moments such as the post torture escape from Blofeld's lair that evoked this character again.
  • Posts: 1,882
    I think there are more instances of Bond looking more realistically tired, hurt, etc. than we remember. Amidst all of its fantasy world, I think of a breathless Bond pausing for a drink in Osato's office after finishing off the big guy. In TB when he's saved at the end by Domino's spear, there's blood on his mouth and he sounds, I don't know if this was intentional, like his mouth is a bit sore when he speaks. He's also visibly worn down by his encounter with Oddjob and subtly panicking as the bomb ticks down in GF.

    So many just want to focus on the clown suit, but the build up to arriving at the air base, Moore's Bond experiences a combination of fatigue and desperation in trying to reach it and his stumbling out of the centrifuge, no quips, after about being killed in MR.

    And in fairness to the two Mendes entries, the fight with Hinx shows Craig's Bond getting it handed to him and his struggle. I think it gets forgotten because it quickly moves onto a makeout scene. SF is more glaring in that we have this out-of-shape and out of touch Bond who is suddenly transformed into his old self when he needs to be from the island sequence onward.
  • edited April 2020 Posts: 3,279
    Octopussy wrote: »
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    The main problem with QoS is the editing. First with the action itself. Opting for the Dan Bradley Bourne style just didn't seem to work within the constraints of a Bond film. CR fared much better in the way sequences like Madagascar was shot and cut together, and this is what audiences have come to expect in a Bond movie.

    And then the scissor-happy tight editing also becomes a problem with the film itself, not just the action. It is trimmed down way too much. Again, audiences have grown to expect a Bond film to breathe, to have those relaxed and slower moments. Unfortunately in QoS they are few and far between.

    Then the story. We know there was a writers strike which hindered the film, but there isn't much to grip the viewer. Its rather confusing in parts, and the direction doesn't help either. When we are not seeing frentic shaky cam action, we witness pretentious style-over-substance shots instead, in an attempt to turn Bond into arthouse cinema. When there isn't a very strong script to hold it all together, you can see why it loses its audience.

    Where QoS triumphs is first with the soundtrack (not the ghastly song). Arnold brings in arguably his best score, evoking retro cool John Barry circa 1971 in parts.

    And secondly the grittiness. Bond bleeds and gets battered here, following on from where we left off in CR. I'm all for seeing Bond like this (the only 2 times it has happened is in CR and LTK).

    This is where Mendes made his fatal mistakes for me in his direction of the 2 films he directed. We didn't see Bond bleed as much. And in SP we have that ridiculous spectacle of Bond springing to life and shooting all the bad guys after suffering a horrendous torture of drills inserted into his brain. In CR Bond recovers in hospital after having his balls whacked. Here, we are back in superhuman Brosnan territory again.

    "Brosnan territory" Oh, you mean Goldfinger through Die Another Day (Minus LTK) Don't pretend like the vast majority of these films are much different than Brosnan's era.

    In Thunderball we see Bond completely helpless in many moments such as being chased down by Fiona Volpe and Largo's men and the finale. He does actually bleed in that chase sequence from the fire in the car. In On Her Majesty's Secret Service there are multiple moments of Bond in dire straits such as Bond evading Blofeld's goons only to be saved by Tracy. In For Your Eyes Only we see Bond nearly killed by being dragged through the coral (he definitely bleeds in this scene) and climbing to St. Cyrils monastery. Sure, these aren't to the extend of Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace but nonetheless there have been moments were Bond has been wounded either physically or physiologically. The Brosnan era (perhaps with the exception of Goldeneye) sees Bond return to a gadget-wielding superman. The sequence where Bond finds the decoder and subsequent car chase in Tomorrow Never Dies has to be one of the most guilty in Bond history when it comes to this, IMO. I think the Mendes duo, but in particular Spectre is that there were moments such as the post torture escape from Blofeld's lair that evoked this character again.

    Thanks OP. You've answered everything for me (although you missed the brilliant centrifuge scene in MR). :-bd
  • Posts: 3,279
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    The main problem with QoS is the editing. First with the action itself. Opting for the Dan Bradley Bourne style just didn't seem to work within the constraints of a Bond film. CR fared much better in the way sequences like Madagascar was shot and cut together, and this is what audiences have come to expect in a Bond movie.

    And then the scissor-happy tight editing also becomes a problem with the film itself, not just the action. It is trimmed down way too much. Again, audiences have grown to expect a Bond film to breathe, to have those relaxed and slower moments. Unfortunately in QoS they are few and far between.

    Then the story. We know there was a writers strike which hindered the film, but there isn't much to grip the viewer. Its rather confusing in parts, and the direction doesn't help either. When we are not seeing frentic shaky cam action, we witness pretentious style-over-substance shots instead, in an attempt to turn Bond into arthouse cinema. When there isn't a very strong script to hold it all together, you can see why it loses its audience.

    Where QoS triumphs is first with the soundtrack (not the ghastly song). Arnold brings in arguably his best score, evoking retro cool John Barry circa 1971 in parts.

    And secondly the grittiness. Bond bleeds and gets battered here, following on from where we left off in CR. I'm all for seeing Bond like this (the only other 2 times it has happened is in CR and LTK).

    This is where Mendes made his fatal mistakes for me in his direction of the 2 films he directed. We didn't see Bond bleed as much. And in SP we have that ridiculous spectacle of Bond springing to life and shooting all the bad guys after suffering a horrendous torture of drills inserted into his brain. In CR Bond recovers in hospital after having his balls whacked. Here, we are back in superhuman Brosnan territory again.

    "Brosnan territory" Oh, you mean Goldfinger through Die Another Day (Minus LTK) Don't pretend like the vast majority of these films are much different than Brosnan's era.

    Did you miss the bit I mentioned above, about it only happening 2 other times in the franchise? I've bolded it in case. I only mentioned the Brosnan era because that is the most recent thing we have to compare to. Before that you have to go way back to 1985 and the Moore era.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,026
    Brosnan got battered and bled in GoldenEye.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,988
    He also visibly injured his shoulder at the end of the pre-titles action in The World Is Not Enough, that was a plot point carried through the film.
  • Posts: 1,882
    He also visibly injured his shoulder at the end of the pre-titles action in The World Is Not Enough, that was a plot point carried through the film.

    Not quite. The problem with that scenario is it's conveniently forgotten as the film goes along. Either Bond heals really quickly or it's just lazy to not incorporate into the rest of the film. It's part of why TWINE is such a frustrating film for me.
  • DrClatterhandDrClatterhand United Kingdom
    Posts: 349
    shamanimal wrote: »
    QOS loses me twice, and this is my problem with it. First, when they're questioning Mr White, and he says "we have people everywhere...", then, what happens? You can only really see in slow-mo. In the cinema I thought M was shot or even killed, but if you watch close there is a milli-second shot of her running off, then there's the chase and the scaffold fight is just a blur, such a shame as I bet it could have been thrilling if you could see what was going on.
    And then Bond goes to that hotel, and after the fight we get the "get in" bit, and I'm completely, utterly lost for the next ten minutes plot-wise. Who is the girl, the black guy on the bike? then she goes to the villain's place by the harbour, and she's wanting to be friends, he just tried to kill her, then there's a body in the water, who is that supposed to be? It's all over the place!
    By the time Bond is on the bike I haven't got a Scooby what's going on and - here's the thing - I've stopped caring! And that's the problem with Quantum. I can't follow the plot at all, and I still can't.
    I will concede I may be thick, as I couldn't make sense of the last Mission Impossible film either. But I haven't struggled with any of the other Bonds (well, TLD has me at times, I must admit).

    What a refreshingly honest and unpretentious post. Lol. Brilliant. I agree too!!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    Brosnan got battered and bled in GoldenEye.

    And TND.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,026
    Murdock wrote: »
    Brosnan got battered and bled in GoldenEye.

    And TND.

    Quite right. That wasn't spaghetti sauce on his chin!
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Murdock wrote: »
    Brosnan got battered and bled in GoldenEye.

    And TND.

    Quite right. That wasn't spaghetti sauce on his chin!

    TND has always struck me as a surprisingly violent Bond film. Not extremely violent, but compared to the rest of the franchise. The guy falling into the paper press and the blood on the paper, torture implements, pushing Carver into the drill, etc.

    It's probably because I saw it really young and it had an impact on me that way.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,988
    BT3366 wrote: »
    He also visibly injured his shoulder at the end of the pre-titles action in The World Is Not Enough, that was a plot point carried through the film.
    Not quite. The problem with that scenario is it's conveniently forgotten as the film goes along.
    Renard knows about the injury and uses it to hurt Bond on their first meeting.

    Later on Bond realizes that point, and it's part of what leads him to distrust and confront Electra.

  • Agent_47Agent_47 Canada
    edited April 2020 Posts: 330
    Octopussy wrote: »
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    The main problem with QoS is the editing. First with the action itself. Opting for the Dan Bradley Bourne style just didn't seem to work within the constraints of a Bond film. CR fared much better in the way sequences like Madagascar was shot and cut together, and this is what audiences have come to expect in a Bond movie.

    And then the scissor-happy tight editing also becomes a problem with the film itself, not just the action. It is trimmed down way too much. Again, audiences have grown to expect a Bond film to breathe, to have those relaxed and slower moments. Unfortunately in QoS they are few and far between.

    Then the story. We know there was a writers strike which hindered the film, but there isn't much to grip the viewer. Its rather confusing in parts, and the direction doesn't help either. When we are not seeing frentic shaky cam action, we witness pretentious style-over-substance shots instead, in an attempt to turn Bond into arthouse cinema. When there isn't a very strong script to hold it all together, you can see why it loses its audience.

    Where QoS triumphs is first with the soundtrack (not the ghastly song). Arnold brings in arguably his best score, evoking retro cool John Barry circa 1971 in parts.

    And secondly the grittiness. Bond bleeds and gets battered here, following on from where we left off in CR. I'm all for seeing Bond like this (the only 2 times it has happened is in CR and LTK).

    This is where Mendes made his fatal mistakes for me in his direction of the 2 films he directed. We didn't see Bond bleed as much. And in SP we have that ridiculous spectacle of Bond springing to life and shooting all the bad guys after suffering a horrendous torture of drills inserted into his brain. In CR Bond recovers in hospital after having his balls whacked. Here, we are back in superhuman Brosnan territory again.

    "Brosnan territory" Oh, you mean Goldfinger through Die Another Day (Minus LTK) Don't pretend like the vast majority of these films are much different than Brosnan's era.

    In Thunderball we see Bond completely helpless in many moments such as being chased down by Fiona Volpe and Largo's men and the finale. He does actually bleed in that chase sequence from the fire in the car. In On Her Majesty's Secret Service there are multiple moments of Bond in dire straits such as Bond evading Blofeld's goons only to be saved by Tracy. In For Your Eyes Only we see Bond nearly killed by being dragged through the coral (he definitely bleeds in this scene) and climbing to St. Cyrils monastery. Sure, these aren't to the extend of Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace but nonetheless there have been moments were Bond has been wounded either physically or physiologically. The Brosnan era (perhaps with the exception of Goldeneye) sees Bond return to a gadget-wielding superman. The sequence where Bond finds the decoder and subsequent car chase in Tomorrow Never Dies has to be one of the most guilty in Bond history when it comes to this, IMO. I think the Mendes duo, but in particular Spectre is that there were moments such as the post torture escape from Blofeld's lair that evoked this character again.

    You are conflating the issue. Moments of peril exist in most Bond films, even the Brosnan's, however @jetsetwilly was putting emphasis on the films where Bond is beaten, tattered and bloody but then went on to single out the Brosnan era. Which I felt was an unnecessary jab. The only films I can recall where Bond really gets bloodied would be DN/FYEO/LTK/GE/CR/QOS.

    The reason I left Thunderball out is, yes Bond is chased in a very tense sequence, shot in the leg, bleeding through the rest of the chase, but the film forgets about this in the very next scene.

    But I'd like to point out some moments of peril in the Brosnan films.

    1. Bond's defeat at the hands of Trevelyan, bloodied, hanging from a ladder with 006 crushing his fingers.

    2. Bond dangling from the hot air balloon, failing his mission, losing the lead and falling from great heights to an injury upon impact.

    3. Bond being held captive and tortured at the hands of Elektra, a steel rod cranked into the back of his neck, no gadgets, no chance... he is only saved by Zukofsky.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,026
    Murdock wrote: »
    Brosnan got battered and bled in GoldenEye.

    And TND.

    Quite right. That wasn't spaghetti sauce on his chin!

    TND has always struck me as a surprisingly violent Bond film. Not extremely violent, but compared to the rest of the franchise. The guy falling into the paper press and the blood on the paper, torture implements, pushing Carver into the drill, etc.

    It's probably because I saw it really young and it had an impact on me that way.

    It was on the cusp of the that transitionary time where PG-13 films started to push the boundaries of the way violence was depicted on screen.

    TND, to me, also rode the wave of the action blockbusters of the time. It has action scenes in there that could rival any Bruckheimer flick. Many would see that as a bad thing, but I just see it as the standout, pure rollercoaster type film that both Connery and Moore had during their runs.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited April 2020 Posts: 5,961
    Murdock wrote: »
    Brosnan got battered and bled in GoldenEye.

    And TND.

    Quite right. That wasn't spaghetti sauce on his chin!

    TND has always struck me as a surprisingly violent Bond film. Not extremely violent, but compared to the rest of the franchise. The guy falling into the paper press and the blood on the paper, torture implements, pushing Carver into the drill, etc.

    It's probably because I saw it really young and it had an impact on me that way.

    TND *is* surprisingly violent. That being said, they really needed to do more with the (threatened) torture scene.
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    Octopussy wrote: »
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    The main problem with QoS is the editing. First with the action itself. Opting for the Dan Bradley Bourne style just didn't seem to work within the constraints of a Bond film. CR fared much better in the way sequences like Madagascar was shot and cut together, and this is what audiences have come to expect in a Bond movie.

    And then the scissor-happy tight editing also becomes a problem with the film itself, not just the action. It is trimmed down way too much. Again, audiences have grown to expect a Bond film to breathe, to have those relaxed and slower moments. Unfortunately in QoS they are few and far between.

    Then the story. We know there was a writers strike which hindered the film, but there isn't much to grip the viewer. Its rather confusing in parts, and the direction doesn't help either. When we are not seeing frentic shaky cam action, we witness pretentious style-over-substance shots instead, in an attempt to turn Bond into arthouse cinema. When there isn't a very strong script to hold it all together, you can see why it loses its audience.

    Where QoS triumphs is first with the soundtrack (not the ghastly song). Arnold brings in arguably his best score, evoking retro cool John Barry circa 1971 in parts.

    And secondly the grittiness. Bond bleeds and gets battered here, following on from where we left off in CR. I'm all for seeing Bond like this (the only 2 times it has happened is in CR and LTK).

    This is where Mendes made his fatal mistakes for me in his direction of the 2 films he directed. We didn't see Bond bleed as much. And in SP we have that ridiculous spectacle of Bond springing to life and shooting all the bad guys after suffering a horrendous torture of drills inserted into his brain. In CR Bond recovers in hospital after having his balls whacked. Here, we are back in superhuman Brosnan territory again.

    "Brosnan territory" Oh, you mean Goldfinger through Die Another Day (Minus LTK) Don't pretend like the vast majority of these films are much different than Brosnan's era.

    In Thunderball we see Bond completely helpless in many moments such as being chased down by Fiona Volpe and Largo's men and the finale. He does actually bleed in that chase sequence from the fire in the car. In On Her Majesty's Secret Service there are multiple moments of Bond in dire straits such as Bond evading Blofeld's goons only to be saved by Tracy. In For Your Eyes Only we see Bond nearly killed by being dragged through the coral (he definitely bleeds in this scene) and climbing to St. Cyrils monastery. Sure, these aren't to the extend of Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace but nonetheless there have been moments were Bond has been wounded either physically or physiologically. The Brosnan era (perhaps with the exception of Goldeneye) sees Bond return to a gadget-wielding superman. The sequence where Bond finds the decoder and subsequent car chase in Tomorrow Never Dies has to be one of the most guilty in Bond history when it comes to this, IMO. I think the Mendes duo, but in particular Spectre is that there were moments such as the post torture escape from Blofeld's lair that evoked this character again.

    Thanks OP. You've answered everything for me (although you missed the brilliant centrifuge scene in MR). :-bd

    That's one of my favourite moments in the series.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    edited April 2020 Posts: 1,756
    People say the PTS is too quickly edited, too shaky. They addressed this issue for Skyfall's PTS and I found it 10x more dull, if not more coherent. Skyfall's PTS is a drag to get through. QoS PTS never overstays it's welcome.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    People say the PTS is too quickly edited, too shaky. They addressed this issue for Skyfall's PTS and I found it 10x more dull, if not more coherent. Skyfall's PTS is a drag to get through. QoS PTS never overstays it's welcome.

    I have to think Skyfall's PTS is much longer than QoS', but maybe that's to your point. I like a lot of the Skyfall PTS and love Patrice. QoS' PTS is also fantastic, and I probably give it the edge because, exactly as you say, it never overstays it's welcome.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,961
    The action scenes give me a migraine, but the dramatic scenes are lovely.

    It's a conundrum of a movie.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    edited April 2020 Posts: 1,261
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Its a terrible film.Pretty much everything went wrong with it.While the writers strike did not help,i cannot understand how the producers viewed Forsters final cut of this film and found the incomprehensible editing acceptable.

    In Some Kind Of Hero, I just read recently, that when BB and MGW had hired a director, they would support him 100 %. So, this might have been the case with QOS (and even DAD). And, yes, the writer's strike really was a big problem with QOS. In this GQ interview Craig said, that they did not have a script when they started shooting, they had a basic plot treatment and the action set pieces, and that Craig and Foster wrote scenes to fill the gaps between action sequences. And the way Mathis is killed and Bond disposing his body in the waste bin actually left a bad taste with me. And the frantic editing gave me a headache upon first watching it. Plus too many action set pieces and not enough storytelling. Having said that, I still prefer QOS over several other entries to the franchise. Also, Craig is very good in this, and Arnold's score is excellent.
  • Posts: 1,882
    BT3366 wrote: »
    He also visibly injured his shoulder at the end of the pre-titles action in The World Is Not Enough, that was a plot point carried through the film.
    Not quite. The problem with that scenario is it's conveniently forgotten as the film goes along.
    Renard knows about the injury and uses it to hurt Bond on their first meeting.

    Later on Bond realizes that point, and it's part of what leads him to distrust and confront Electra.

    Sorry, you are correct as I should've clarified my point. I meant after the Renard shoulder thing and it is a crucial plot point. My thing is after this is all revealed that Bond is back to being himself and no evidence of the shoulder being a problem after the big reveal. They could've at least shown him to wince or grab the shoulder to massage it after action.

    Or better still, have Renard use it as a point to hurt Bond during their final confrontation. Maybe the bullet to the head was affecting his memory.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,026
    I do agree that the finale is weak. That was never one of the reasons why, but I can add it to the list along with bad pacing, fight choreography, and a hokey villain death.
  • Agent_47Agent_47 Canada
    Posts: 330
    BT3366 wrote: »
    BT3366 wrote: »
    He also visibly injured his shoulder at the end of the pre-titles action in The World Is Not Enough, that was a plot point carried through the film.
    Not quite. The problem with that scenario is it's conveniently forgotten as the film goes along.
    Renard knows about the injury and uses it to hurt Bond on their first meeting.

    Later on Bond realizes that point, and it's part of what leads him to distrust and confront Electra.

    Sorry, you are correct as I should've clarified my point. I meant after the Renard shoulder thing and it is a crucial plot point. My thing is after this is all revealed that Bond is back to being himself and no evidence of the shoulder being a problem after the big reveal. They could've at least shown him to wince or grab the shoulder to massage it after action.

    Or better still, have Renard use it as a point to hurt Bond during their final confrontation. Maybe the bullet to the head was affecting his memory.

    He does show discomfort during the buzzsaw helicopter attack. Which is late in the film. I'm always surprised that TWINE catches so much flack for a dislocated collar bone, it could have used a little bit more emphasis, but even so... it's still the most prominent injury Bond has carried through a film. It's atleast more consistent than his injuries is Skyfall.
  • Posts: 1,882
    Agent_47 wrote: »
    BT3366 wrote: »
    BT3366 wrote: »
    He also visibly injured his shoulder at the end of the pre-titles action in The World Is Not Enough, that was a plot point carried through the film.
    Not quite. The problem with that scenario is it's conveniently forgotten as the film goes along.
    Renard knows about the injury and uses it to hurt Bond on their first meeting.

    Later on Bond realizes that point, and it's part of what leads him to distrust and confront Electra.

    Sorry, you are correct as I should've clarified my point. I meant after the Renard shoulder thing and it is a crucial plot point. My thing is after this is all revealed that Bond is back to being himself and no evidence of the shoulder being a problem after the big reveal. They could've at least shown him to wince or grab the shoulder to massage it after action.

    Or better still, have Renard use it as a point to hurt Bond during their final confrontation. Maybe the bullet to the head was affecting his memory.

    He does show discomfort during the buzzsaw helicopter attack. Which is late in the film. I'm always surprised that TWINE catches so much flack for a dislocated collar bone, it could have used a little bit more emphasis, but even so... it's still the most prominent injury Bond has carried through a film. It's atleast more consistent than his injuries is Skyfall.

    I've leveled the same criticism at SF. Bond is out of action, out of shape, lost a step, etc. But when he needs to be Bond again he summons everything that makes the character unique and rises to the occasion and it's all conveniently forgotten. One could point to NSNA for doing this as well

    Not that I want to see Bond fail due to an injury, it's just why go to the trouble to make these points in a story and not go through the whole way? Tom Cruise's Ethan Hunt gets the hell knocked out of him, falls off motorcycles at high speeds, etc. in each MI movie, but gets right back up and they move on and don't dwell on it. Yes, it makes him more of a cartoon character, then again so has Bond been for years. The difference is they don't treat it as a plot point only to forget about it after it has served its purpose.
Sign In or Register to comment.