Jump to content

Quantum of Solace or Casino Royale.

FireKnife

By FireKnife,
in Off-Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Walton_County_Firefighter

Walton_County_Firefighter

Posted
Posted

Well I'm going to see QoS tonight with a lady friend. Hopefully it will be good, but I hate the fact that Coke had to get in an advertisement. It obviously isn't enough that you see coke banners in the theater lobby, now they invade my movie as well. You'd think with all the advertising money, the cost to see the freaking movie wouldn't be $10.

Link to post
Share on other sites
doc_newstead

doc_newstead

Posted
Posted

Dunno... thought the eye candy was of a better quality in Quantum, but liked the 'feel' of Casino a bit more. Will need multiple repeated viewings to reach a conclusion, and possibly access to a building site, some high-explosives & Saville Row tailors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wraith18A

Wraith18A

Posted
Posted

I saw it on FRI night, and I thought it was a good movie, and will be added to my collection at some point. Most of everyone's issues that I noted in the film I thought to be flimsy charges at best; the theme song was better than most of them (for personal comsumption) have been in the past; how Bond hops about is also more in-line with real espionage activities; the fight sequences were properly energetic and intense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BigAl

BigAl

Posted
Posted
As for Hammerfalls comment about the Beretta and the PPK, it was replaced when Major Boothrood sent a letter to Fleming with a request to arm Bond more effectivley, the expression 'nice and light; in a ladies handbag' is one he actually used in his talks with Fleming which lead to a change (also Major Boothrood appears in both the film and book version of Dr. No), the whole Beretta jam at the end of From Russia With Love is what M refers Bond to at the start of Dr. No (as in book sequence it is the other way round). Bond also carries a hammerless S&W pocket revolver .38 Special in Dr. No but he soon looses it. Finally he even has a 'Long Barreled' Colt 1911 in the dashboard of his Bentley and Aston Martin in the books but never gets a chance to fire it off.

 

Ok random Bond facts over for now methinks.

 

'FireKnife'

 

Major Boothroyd was the Secret Service Armourer Fleming created as a nod to Ian Boothroyd the british gun expert and writer who contacted him and suggested re arming Bond;

 

The disciplines Fleming absorbed as a correspondent for Reuters in the 1930s made him a stickler for accuracy, and the exhibition shows how this fed into Bond’s guns. A luxuriantly mustached British gun expert, Geoffrey Boothroyd, reproved Fleming in a 1950s letter for Bond’s “rather deplorable taste in firearms” — in particular the penchant of the early Bond for a Beretta pistol, which Mr. Boothroyd, later the model for Major Boothroyd, Bond’s secret service armorer, described as “a ladies’ gun.” At Mr. Boothroyd’s urging, the Bond of “Dr. No” and later novels progressed to a Walther PPK and what Mr. Boothroyd described as “a real man-stopper,” a Smith & Wesson .38 Centennial Airweight.

 

The above paragraph was pinched from here;

 

A New York Times Book Review.

 

Edit: Oh yeah as for QOS not seen it yet, probably going tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stealthbomber

Stealthbomber

Posted
Posted
toughie... the plot in casino royale is better but the action and cinematography in quantum and solace is way superior!

Erm, TBH I got the exact opposite idea.

 

You could pretty much summarise Casino Royale as "Bond gets told to play cards with some bad guys and several people die". :mellow:

I don't remember much about the screenplay of CR but I found Quantum of Solace to be VERY annoying in a "music video" sort of way.

Firstly, I'm guessing it was edited the way it was so that we, the audience, felt the same confusion that Bond would be feeling in that situation but, you know what?

You don't NEED to do that. Actors are capable of demonstrating emotions for the benefit of the audience.

Novelists rarely leave the reader in the dark. They sketch out each character in previous chapters so when they meet each other the reader is aware of things that the characters, themselves, might not even be aware of.

An audience has a right to that. They're paying to see the film.

Secondly, the way the fight scenes were all filmed at a low frame rate in a "handicam" style was totally unneccesary.

Again, we're a smart audience. If we see Bond and a baddie knocking the cr*p out of each other we'll know it's a nasty fight. We don't need 2 second cuts showing fists and blood and guns and feet and ripped shirts and whatever else to know that fights are nasty things.

Besides, the cynic in me can't help thinking they edit the film like that to avoid choreographing a proper fight sequence.

 

Anyway, that aside I'm actually starting to like the whole re-inventing of James Bond.

I actually wouldn't mind too much if they went on to re-make some of the other Bond movies as well.

I always thought Pierce Brosnan was the best Bond but I thought they were scraping the bottom of the barrel for stories.

Roger Moore had the best big-budget plots but, alas, he was a terrible Bond. IMO.

 

I'm not too sure about the odd mix of old and new as well as some of the hang-overs from the previous series.

Judie Dench makes a good "M" but, for the sake of continuity she should really have been re-cast.

 

Also, what's Bond doing shooting a PPK again?

I know it's a trade-mark but so were the suits he wore and the cars he drove.

Unless Bond is to remain stranded in 1964 forever, the PPK needs to go the same way as the DB4.

 

So, what did I think of it?

I liked it.

It wasn't a traditional Bond film but it had enough of the ingredients to make it feel like a proper big-budget adventure movie which is the way a Bond film SHOULD make the audience feel IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The End

The End

Posted
Posted
Erm, TBH I got the exact opposite idea.

 

 

 

Also, what's Bond doing shooting a PPK again?

I know it's a trade-mark but so were the suits he wore and the cars he drove.

Unless Bond is to remain stranded in 1964 forever, the PPK needs to go the same way as the DB4.

 

as I remeber, he drove a DB5?

 

Either way, the aston is simply classy, nothing wrong with that.

 

I just didn't like QS because I felt that this should have been tacked onto Casino Royal. Like what many others have stated, there weren't any real unique bond moments in this film? It just felt too ordinary. The only cool gadget was the touch table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stealthbomber

Stealthbomber

Posted
Posted
as I remeber, he drove a DB5?

 

Either way, the aston is simply classy, nothing wrong with that.

Whatever.

 

Point being that, just because he drove a DB5 in a book written in the 1950s, the film-makers don't continue to put him in one today.

Same should apply to the weapon IMO.

I suspect most directors/producers/screenwriters like the idea of giving him a PPK simply because it's iconic without considering if it's sensible.

 

Thing that really bugs me about this is that they appear to be making a fairly thorough job of re-inventing the Bond franchise as a 21st century concept but, for some reason, they insist on giving him that damned PPK.

 

I just didn't like QS because I felt that this should have been tacked onto Casino Royal. Like what many others have stated, there weren't any real unique bond moments in this film? It just felt too ordinary. The only cool gadget was the touch table.

Personally, I've never really needed the fancy gadgets and overblown storylines to make a Bond movie.

I think the hallmark of a Bond movie is the way it takes you on an adventure and QoS managed that pretty well IMO.

 

Conversely, despite thinking Brosnan was an excellent Bond, I really hated most of his Bond movies. It was as though the writers had run out of good ideas and, instead, just packed the movies with invisible cars and laser watches.

 

Oddly enough, having said that, it still baffles me how people can compare the Bourne movies to Bond films.

Ok, I know they were both supposed to be secret agents but the movies, themselves, had very little in common.

The Bourne films (good as they were) seemed similar to summat like The French Connection rather than a Bond movie, to me at least.

Perhaps QoS is more like a Bourne film but it still has enough whizzy stuff happening so you know it must be a Bond film.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
askeytheman

askeytheman

Posted
Posted

Neither.

 

I liked the action that was in them, but it just wasnt 'Bond'

 

Walking out the cinema i heard one woman say 'That was too farfetched for me, i wanted the old Bond' - i thought, No where near enough farfetched, i want lasers in the sky, awesome watches and cars with guns. And jet packs. Lots of jet packs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
snowman

snowman

Posted
Posted

QOS - Easy choice...

 

Casino Royale had Eva Green in it and she was just rubbish as a Bond girl... Sexy? Not even close.

 

More importantly it felt like a Bond FILM - Casino Royale was a good espionage film, but wore it's Bourne Inheritance (see what I did there?) too prominently.

 

QOS felt like they'd got away with bringing the brand into the 21st century and were prepared to give a tiny bit back to everyone who loved James Bond films over the years (yes, even some of the dire Moore ones).

 

There were just a few tantalising glimpses of the Connery Bond in there, amongst all the cold blooded killing and cut-away shot fight scenes.

 

That said, for an opening sequence, this is the best I've seen since Star Wars 3 (or whatever it was called, the last one with the flyby shot of the huge cruiser zooming out to reveal a huge above planet spaceship armada battle).

 

That 'theme tune' though - CR's at least grew on me AND seemed appropriate when the titles came up - This one was truly dreadful and Alicia really should stay behind her keyboard...

 

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The End

The End

Posted
Posted
QOS - Easy choice...

 

Casino Royale had Eva Green in it and she was just rubbish as a Bond girl... Sexy? Not even close.

 

More importantly it felt like a Bond FILM - Casino Royale was a good espionage film, but wore it's Bourne Inheritance (see what I did there?) too prominently.

 

 

Cheers.

 

Eva green was good, and there was trhat other bird who ended up being found killed in the hammock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.

  I accept