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
QOS is underrated
and still absolutely terrible on every level
I fully agree. But I've come to the conclusion that the producers deliberately chose this approach to make people watch the film again, in order to understand what's going on on the next attempt. I know it worked for me (I keep discovering things upon review), which doesn't mean I understand everything going on in the movie yet. Personally, I think that re-editing the film stock of QOS by someone without ADHS might turn it into one of the best James Bond films of the entire series. But it won't happen.
Some of the quiet character moments, like Bond apologizing to Camille or confronting Yussef, are among the greatest scenes of the Craig era. QOS has wonderful stuff to offer, but chooses to hide some of it.
The direct reference to Goldfinger is a red flag, but good editing would make the film more watchable, that's true.
I feel sorry for Olga Kurylenko because she deserved a better movie.
To me, it's like Bourne Legacy; I enjoy it more as a generic action movie.
It’s a bit like SP. Or perhaps something like TMWTGG. One can imagine a better film being in there. But the ideas are there.
Story wise, and character (Bond) wise I think it is the best film in the series. I love the film for beeing the sole film where Bond's character is shown dispite the circumstances, instead of leading the circumstances. Dedicated to do his job. Added to that is Camille who is a far more interesting 'partner' as we learn a bit of her background. Greene is selfish, arrogant and hence flawed, human and crazy. 'you just lost another one' is a real stab in the heart line. And yes, dialogue in QoS is also among the best in the series. It feels real.
The locales are stunning, and, even in today's world, exotic.
Sure, the editing is too much, especially at the start. And some scenes are not properly explained. But the latter at least happens in almost all the films and the launching of the boat is far less jarring to me than, say, managing to get an underground train to drop in.
True, in some ways it's the only "normal" Bond film of the Craig era
The only one not dominated by personal drama
I'm also not a fan of the villain's plot. Too corporate, and not really calling for British involvement. But overall, the film is quite good and I wish it was inspiration for the rest of Craig's run.
I tend to think of the opposite, it's for me the most personal, he went after Quantum because of Vesper's death, it's meant to be a revenge story regarding of what happened to Vesper, but it turned to be a convoluted mess, molding Bond after Bourne.
The 'Bond getting revenge' angle was done better in LTK, in my opinion.
The plot was timely at the time regarding the Nestle controversy (?) As for too corporate, we did have AVTAK and GF (which where the film's plot have been recycled from, I could argue) and the plots of the latter two are also not calling for British involvement (also see DAD), I think the plot is fine, it's that, it's not executed well, but I do understand the circumstances at the time regarding the 'Writer's Strike'.
But the fact that one could believe it was a Nestle plot is what I mean by corporate. It's exploitative, and not nice, but all the water was procured "legally" from the new government. If a real company could do it and get away with it, I don't think it could fit in a Bond film.
AVTAK and GF are "corporate" in the sense of relying on a financial aspect for the plan. No actual company (despite any disclaimer in the former) would cause a Silicon Valley flood, or detonate a dirty bomb in Fort Knox.
DAD does ask for British involvement, or rather, NATO involvement. North Korea getting weapons illegally and threatening South Korea is a pretty startling scheme for the countries who fought for South Korea in the first place (never mind the "British" citizen who is a key piece in this weapons smuggling). That's why everything seems to be a joint-operation between MI6 and the "NSA."
I agree that the film lacks coherence and a uniform vision, but that chaos, too, feels perfectly at home in the '60s. As a Bond film, it's a travesty, so it's probably best to simply not think of it as such. Once freed from the idea that it is even remotely meant as a serious adaptation of Fleming's novel, CR67 may be viewed as an absurd yet lavish and glamorous adventure, packed with loads of big names, a great and memorable score, and tremendous sets.
Bond fans sometimes treat the film as one of the worst things ever thrown on the big screen, but I beg to differ. I honestly think that it's not just one of the best '60s spy spoofs altogether, but an intriguing and enjoyable celebration of Hollywood hubris, diva attitudes, and money-over-art production ethics. I continue to admire the fact that this film got released in the first place, seeing how big a debacle its filming had been. Whenever I shoot myself through a 007 marathon, I'm always happy to take the Peter Sellers / David Niven detour. It's grotesque and sumptuous, hilarious as well as hilariously "off", but I'm never not fascinated by this film that somehow never becomes dull or runs out of gorgeous women. In conclusion, my controversial opinion is that while CR67 is a parody of Bond, it's absolutely not a bad film on its own, or at least not unworthy of one's time.
It's certainly a movie "of it's time" and on closer inspection it does actually have a consistent internal logic, however, like most "Swinging 60s" style comedys, it's just not nearly as funny as it thinks it is.
Could be something to do with the substances some of the people involved were imbibing?
I know a few peope who have been in rock bands that once played a gig after having a few, and they said that while the band all felt they were playing great, the audience didn't...
That's what M thinks. But in fact he's going after Quantum because it's an organisation that had infiltrated itself in MI6. He keeps putting the job first and his personal revenge second. Only when he gets Greene, he makes sure his fate fits what he has done. He is, in a way, more professional in QoS than he is in LTK. It's only after M has Bond arrested, and he escapes, she understands that it wasn't him on a revenge rampage. That's why she suddenly tells whossisname 'I don't care what the Americans say, he's my agent'.
The fact that Greene's current plan isn't directed at the UK doesn't make a difference. He knows they infiltrated MI6, and h knows they form a danger, and Greene isn't the top boss. That's why I was so dissapointed they suddenly turned Quantum into Spectre. They had a fantastic set-up to continue with.
As for the corporate part: it's just one of the extortion schemes they're doing. Hence the meeting in Bregenz. And yes, it could've been more fleshed out, but that shouldvé been done in the next film.