I absolutely loved Casino Royale, and from what I’ve seen of the trailer for Quantum of Solace (which I’ve seen several times now ) it looks freaking awesome. I’ve also heard rumours that it takes place directly after the final scene of Casino Royale.

It looks like a good movie (although the title is ridiculous), at the same time it feels like a Bourne movie James Bond style..

I think this movie will be great...at least I am hoping it will.

Also, why is this in Worst of 2008?

quote:

Originally posted by mymindsblank:
why is this in Worst of 2008?

Doh! I've accidently put it in the wrong section

I've sent a PM to Eric asking to move it

Don't move it. It's fine here since Quantum of Solace movie doesn't follow the plot from Quantum of Solace book and it's offshoot from the James bond storyline anyway.

It cannot be very good.

I was a little bit disappointed by Quantum, with an expectation of matching up with the Casino Royale. The character was not fully developed from the image of a heart-broken revenger who barely recovered from the death of his loved one. Bond's roof-jumping ability was secondary to Bourne, so I really wondered how much Forster can take on an action movie. Kurylenko was hot but also was boring as the Bond girl. Bond made unprofessional killer mistake, which devastated Bond's inside essence. Beside the value of forgiveness, I also learn a good lesson that the omnipotent Amex black card can also be turned off just like any other card.

quote:

Sese Participant
Posted 16 November 2008 07:52 PM

I was a little bit disappointed by Quantum, with an expectation of matching up with the Casino Royale. The character was not fully developed from the image of a heart-broken revenger who barely recovered from the death of his loved one. Bond's roof-jumping ability was secondary to Bourne, so I really wondered how much Forster can take on an action movie. Kurylenko was hot but also was boring as the Bond girl. Bond made unprofessional killer mistake, which devastated Bond's inside essence. Beside the value of forgiveness, I also learn a good lesson that the omnipotent Amex black card can also be turned off just like any other card.

I was almost blow away by the movie (impressed) which actually is pretty amazing considering I was put off by the first two action sequences which I thought were pretty lame (though not without a little technical merit for future movies). When the movie started off so poorly with its first bad impression but then to continue building and finish off with a great flourish meant for me that the movie had to be really good. This is one of the best Bond movies to date.

I saw it this past weekend, and I thought it was okay. It was well made, but ultimately forgettable. It wasn't as good as Casino Royale, and I thought the dude from The Diving Bell and the Butterfly made for a pretty lame villain.

What makes the villain in Quantum of Solace, Dominic Greene, so compelling isn't his outlandish and overly dramatic parody of villainous behavior or acting, it is his portrayal of a psychopath that is evil. As with the rest of this movie, the darker, the more gritty realistic drama is more emotionally viseral because it is more real. Is it more scary. It is more possible. This movie isn't about fantastic imagination, techno-wizardry, but hard core espionage and dangerous crime. As such Dominic Greene does reflect the greed, the criminals out in this world today, not some made up character - he symbolizes what we, the audience, fear may actually exist and it is up to James Bond our hero to save us. Dominic Greene may not be memorable, but as a universal reflection of Thrush (the original global organization in the earlier Bond movies) we have something even more sinister and impressive.

But, he doesn't come across that scary at all. There's nothing psychopathic about him. He's just a shady businessman trying to rip off the Bolivian government. Although bad, that's hardly work for MI6's top spy. What's next? Bond goes after AIG executives? White collar crime doesn't make for exciting action movies.

This movie defines mediocrity. After the thrill ride that was "Casino Royale," this movie comes along and drags Bond back down.

Shall I list the issues?

Poor, boring villain.

Decent action, but filmed too Bourne-y; too many quick cuts.

Transition between scenes felt odd at times, like the editor went out for a donut and found the film already pressed and sent to theatres.

Story was slightly vague, and the poor transitions didn't help one follow it.

Anti-climactic ending. I didn't know the movie was finished until the credits started rolling.

At least Daniel Craig is still good as Bond, but this movie didn't really explore his character much. Maybe next time.

Dominic Green was fantastic in the Diving Bell and the Butterfly, but in Quantum of Solace he was rigid and uninteresting. The only saving grace of this movie to me was Craig's brutal portrayal of Bond. Craig's performance of course it not enough to salvage a movie of mediocrity with a few memorable moments.

The whole revenge story is mediocre and offers very little character insight. What could have been a brooding character study into Bond's torn emotional state, is instead a standard if somewhat brutal revenge flick against an ominous and all powerful company, boy never heard of one of those before.

This film is high on my list for worst of 2008. I had two problems with it: 1. all action, little plot and 2. no Bond. Perhaps Craig could play Bond, but the director or producers didn't want him to. This was just an average action film, not a Bond film.

As I grow older, I guess I've become underwhelmed by the American penchant for more is better. The American public has to have creepier bad guys, more action, more plot, more thrills, more of everything. At some point, it all becomes a blur while the public eagerly awaits the next installment of more and more, that only serves to push back into neverland the last outing. With Quantum of Solace, the espionage film gets a refreshing retrolook back at the visceral, emotionally dense spy movie. I finally enjoyed for once a Bond ending that didn't have to employ some fancy, tricky ending. I finally enjoyed a real bad person that could actually be a real person in this world, not some overblown, fantastic caricature. There were no fancy techno-gadgets to detract from the physical and mental action going on. The plot was fluid, dark, in the background as all good spy movies should be (why else are spy movies supposed to be dealing with secrets?). This version of Bond gets back to the original book psychology and pathos of James Bond, the conflict between his duty and the people who get caught up in the overkill. Craig's performance was understated as a good spy should be yet his pain and suffering both physical and mental are available to be seen. It's nice to have a real person this time not some superhero.

quote:

As I grow older, I guess I've become underwhelmed by the American penchant for more is better. The American public has to have creepier bad guys, more action, more plot, more thrills, more of everything. At some point, it all becomes a blur while the public eagerly awaits the next installment of more and more, that only serves to push back into neverland the last outing.

I suppose this is true to some extent. However, what I think it all comes down to is, what is a well made film? For my money, Casino Royale is the better made film, and a high-point in the Bond series as a whole. Not only is it a great Bond movie, it's just a great movie, period. I was expecting a great movie with Quantom of Solace. What I got may have been an OK Bond movie, but it was a mediocre film, for reasons that I've listed above.

I applaud the filmmakers and the writers for trying to provide a continuing story, unlike previous Bond films. And I applaud them for going down a (relatively) realistic path, but something feels off. Perhaps it's the combination of the realistic (the plot, the bad guy) and the absurd (the ridiculous, poorly filmed action scenes).

quote:

ProfAmaretto Know-It-All
Posted 29 November 2008 01:55

quote:
As I grow older, I guess I've become underwhelmed by the American penchant for more is better. The American public has to have creepier bad guys, more action, more plot, more thrills, more of everything. At some point, it all becomes a blur while the public eagerly awaits the next installment of more and more, that only serves to push back into neverland the last outing.

I suppose this is true to some extent. However, what I think it all comes down to is, what is a well made film? For my money, Casino Royale is the better made film, and a high-point in the Bond series as a whole. Not only is it a great Bond movie, it's just a great movie, period. I was expecting a great movie with Quantom of Solace. What I got may have been an OK Bond movie, but it was a mediocre film, for reasons that I've listed above.

I applaud the filmmakers and the writers for trying to provide a continuing story, unlike previous Bond films. And I applaud them for going down a (relatively) realistic path, but something feels off. Perhaps it's the combination of the realistic (the plot, the bad guy) and the absurd (the ridiculous, poorly filmed action scenes).

I'm willing to suspend my judgment vis and vis Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. You raised an intriguing question using Casino Royale as a standard to judge Quantum of Solace. As my recollection regarding Casino Royale is fuzzy as a growing charactistic of my growing older, I will need to see it again so I can see what you're talking about. I have to agree with you about the

quote:

the ridiculous, poorly filmed action scenes

they were in my mind the worst part about the movie and almost destroyed the movie for me, but fortunately most of the crap was in the beginning of the movie.

quote:

I'm willing to suspend my judgment vis and vis Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. You raised an intriguing question using Casino Royale as a standard to judge Quantum of Solace. As my recollection regarding Casino Royale is fuzzy as a growing charactistic of my growing older, I will need to see it again so I can see what you're talking about

It's certainly worth it. I think the reason why I judge them together, is because Casino Royale made Bond interesting again for me. Brosnan was OK in Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies, but it was essentially the same old shtick. Craig makes Bond seem like a real person, which I like, and the plot of Casino Royale was really well-executed and interesting. Definitely see it again and let me know what you think.

this certainly is not a better movie than Casino Royale, but it's not a film deserving to be on the worst of 2008 list. i mean, cmon...storyline? in a bond movie? i think the highlight of 007 movies are the action and maybe an average storyline to piece them together. but i do see where you guys get the complaint on storyline in Quantum of Solace from.

well I’m a big fan of 007 I have seen all the movies of bond (even one whit Peter Sellers) and while watching this movie I was wondering were was Matt Damond because this is the 4th Jason Borne movie, It wasn’t a James Bond movie at all!!! It didn’t felt like one, and I know that the franchise has to evolve but it did to a point that it isn’t a 007 movie anymore where is Monepeny and Q, were are the gadgets and his Rolex also the Fords cars well just doesn’t quite fit on a Bond movie, well this is just the end of a journey for the franchise and were it is going I don’t know, I just hope that next Bond and directors of 007 movies retake the magic of better times and don’t let them to be forgotten, so it deserves to be in worst of 2008

quote:

norecuerdo Slacker
Posted 11 December 2008 07:12 PM

well I’m a big fan of 007 I have seen all the movies of bond (even one whit Peter Sellers) and while watching this movie I was wondering were was Matt Damond because this is the 4th Jason Borne movie, It wasn’t a James Bond movie at all!!! It didn’t felt like one, and I know that the franchise has to evolve but it did to a point that it isn’t a 007 movie anymore where is Monepeny and Q, were are the gadgets and his Rolex also the Fords cars well just doesn’t quite fit on a Bond movie, well this is just the end of a journey for the franchise and were it is going I don’t know, I just hope that next Bond and directors of 007 movies retake the magic of better times and don’t let them to be forgotten, so it deserves to be in worst of 2008

I agree that this movie had very little of the 007 accouterments (military outfit) and I can somewhat understand why you would be disappointed. However, I've changed. Growing up I really enjoyed the gadgets, Rolex watches, the women. Yet as I've grown older, I've come to enjoy the intellectual, visual, the visceral components of espionage movies more. I've read somewhere that this movie is more in line with the original source material. Personally for me this is one of the best 007 movies just for the fact that it departs from the 007 gimmicks. As for its Jason Bourne resemblance, it's not quite on the same level - in fact its more brutal, more subject to human suffering and gritty and more edgy which I enjoy. I hope to see more of the same. However, I can understand the discomfort of losing an old friend, a constant companion of entertainment that's been around for years. So if the next 007 veers back towards the more traditional 007, I'll accept it and be happy for you. I'll probably enjoy it a bit less, but I don't mind the fancy stuff once in a while and hopefully the movie industry will make another franchise more like this newer 007.