Quantum of Solice - dissapointing :(

  • Thread starter Thread starter uv
  • Start date Start date

uv

uv

uv

Soldato
Joined
16 May 2006
Posts
8,436
Location
Manchester
I know there's a trailer thread, but this is my opinion after seeing the film :)

**SPOILERS AHEAD**





Now, I know these films are the prequels, explaining Bonds character and mindset.. but my god, this film was a borefest. Almost every Bond film so far (except her majesty's secret service, which is barely a Bond film) has had some great arch enemy, a fantastic baddie. This film gave us a nerd with a stupid plot and a sidekick with a bowl hair cut.
Bond spends the entire film seeking revenge for his killed lover, although every other film portrays him as a womanizer, a wham-bam-thankyou-mam guy - now he's showing his feelings, and his feelings are ****.
Whilst the car chase was pretty action packed, it was shot too close in.. there was absolutely no sense of speed, and no sense of tension. The car had no gadets, and whilst I know this is pre 'Q' era, the car chase just felt.. empty.

And then we get to the end game..
It may as well have been Speilberg with his Aliens for all I cared. The film finishes with Bond finding closure. No massive 'Boss Fight', no explosions, no majestic action packed gunfights.. imo, the film should have finished ten minutes earlier than it did.

I enjoyed the film, as I'm an absolute sucker for the 007 universe, but this was one of the biggest let downs I've seen at the cinema recently :(
 
uvmain said:
No massive 'Boss Fight', no explosions, no majestic action packed gunfights..
Click to expand...

Erm... did you miss the bit where he goes to that hotel where the general and police guy are?

Boss fight? Check.

Explosions? Check.

Gunfight? That's how he gets in, plus there's loads of gunplay all through the film.


Maybe I'm easily pleased, but I still haven't read an opinion on this fair internet that matches my own on this film... I loved it. Possibly as good as Casino Royale, and that had the interesting-first-time-but-dull-on-rewatches poker match in the middle...

I need to see this again, I think.
 
So you prefer the paint by numbers approach of the last 10-15 Bonds? Even though QoS might not be peoples cup of tea I have to congratulate them on actually trying something different especially on such a clichéd institution...

It has all the elements we are used to just not with the American in-your-face style...

The film was OK and was better for the fact it wasnt a normal Bond film - just like Casino Royale - the premise that it was a sequel to CR meant that issues raised in CR had to be tied up in QoS...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
ps3ud0 said:
So you prefer the paint by numbers approach of the last 10-15 Bonds? Even though QoS might not be peoples cup of tea I have to congratulate them on actually trying something different especially on such a clichéd institution...

It has all the elements we are used to just not with the American in-your-face style...

The film was OK and was better for the fact it wasnt a normal Bond film - just like Casino Royale - the premise that it was a sequel to CR meant that issues raised in CR had to be tied up in QoS...

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

Well said, I really enjoyed it and thats mainly down to the fact that its different
 
Trying something different is one thing, but that's not why I disliked this film so much. To me, this was an exceptionally poorly made film. It felt horrible unbalanced and as if they'd cut half of the scenes out or something and it really just felt aimless. I can feel what effect they were going for, but I really felt it came up short. For instance, the part where they discover what should have been the biggest plot twist and possibly the biggest part of the film, when they discover the dam... What happens then? It barely gets mentioned again and even when it was discovered I was like "Wha? :confused:" as it felt like it had just appeared there. Even the part before it, I vaguely remember Bond asking Camille something, but it just felt like they stole a Range Rover, drove into the desert, found an airport, borrowed a plane, flew it around a bit, randomly got shot at by other planes (possibly to do with the call?) then they parachuted out and landed near one of the dams. I was just thinking "WHY?!?!???". Then the end part in that desert complex.. I'm not even go into how utterly awful that scene was and the ending as well... As soon as Bond confronted him I got hopeful and was thinking that maybe he was going to confront him and there would be some good dialogue, but alas not. He just walked out and we didn't get to see anything. :(

3/10 - possibly THE most disappointing film I've ever seen.
 
uvmain said:
I know there's a trailer thread, but this is my opinion after seeing the film :)

**SPOILERS AHEAD**





Now, I know these films are the prequels, explaining Bonds character and mindset.. but my god, this film was a borefest. Almost every Bond film so far (except her majesty's secret service, which is barely a Bond film) has had some great arch enemy, a fantastic baddie. This film gave us a nerd with a stupid plot and a sidekick with a bowl hair cut.
Bond spends the entire film seeking revenge for his killed lover, although every other film portrays him as a womanizer, a wham-bam-thankyou-mam guy - now he's showing his feelings, and his feelings are ****.
Whilst the car chase was pretty action packed, it was shot too close in.. there was absolutely no sense of speed, and no sense of tension. The car had no gadets, and whilst I know this is pre 'Q' era, the car chase just felt.. empty.

And then we get to the end game..
It may as well have been Speilberg with his Aliens for all I cared. The film finishes with Bond finding closure. No massive 'Boss Fight', no explosions, no majestic action packed gunfights.. imo, the film should have finished ten minutes earlier than it did.

I enjoyed the film, as I'm an absolute sucker for the 007 universe, but this was one of the biggest let downs I've seen at the cinema recently :(
Click to expand...

It's meant to be more like the books than the old films. Are you really that much of a sucker for the 007 universe? Or just the film part of it?

That being said, it feeled in being like the books as well, so that was pretty rubbish.
 
I agree with naffa, mostly. However I think, despite horrible first impressions, it will actually be quite good on a rewatch - the other Bonds are quite boring now, in comparison. I don't think the ending was *that* bad, I think it was actually pretty typical Bond, but it didn't measure up to the scene where he was dangling and reaching for the gun (rooftops was annoyingly similar to Bourne though).

Seems they are treading very carefully - low key and subtley and poor storytelling/pacing = 'intelligence' and 'complexity' - and multiple viewings from idiots like me.

Disagree with the OP, Bond clearly womanizes (oil covered girl?), and 'feelings' and seeking revenge are not new to Bond - see Diamonds Are Forever. However, it is intensely overplayed along with the action, and thus wasn't engaging.

I think they downplayed the main 'environmental' twist fearing a backlash that Bond is 'saving the environment' (although I think there was something about melting polar icecaps in previous a Bond) and also backlash from portraying environmental concern as a device for manipulation to gain power.

I like these new brand of villains though, kind of. I like the fact that they're unassuming - but they need to ditch the 'sinister' qualities completely as its just silly - but then without them they are just boring though, toughie. Best villain so far is Mr White.
 
Last edited:
Watched this today. I thought it was OK, not as good as Casino Royale though. I definately prefer these new films over the 'shaken-but-not-stirred' Bond films of old though.
 
Last edited:
Just as DreXel said, I enjoyed it, not as much as Casino Royale but I prefer these to the cheesey old bonds. QoS was very action packed but the storyline was a bit unbalanced. Some events also seemed to happen randomly for no reason at all, which confused me slightly.

I do like that the new films are centered more on Bonds character/person, they are more involving than the usual gimmicky cheese. God I hated Pearce Brosnan.
 
Captain Planet said:
I do like that the new films are centered more on Bonds character/person, they are more involving than the usual gimmicky cheese. God I hated Pearce Brosnan.
Click to expand...

LIES! Goldeneye is brilliant, and he would have been a good Bond if he'd only had some decent films written for him!
 
I just want to punch his face, hard. I could never buy him as bond, I always see him as some pathetic jumped up loser like on Mrs Doubtfire :D
 
I thought the film was really good. Slightly understated and more subtle compared to bond films of old (compare it to Die Another Day), and more in the same vain as Casino Royale.

The change to a more personal look a the character was refreshing, but they did, in turn, neglect to address the general consistency of storyline and elaboration of the actual plot. So, it was more confusing that it needed to be.

Still, 8.5/10 from me.

Next film going to continue from this one as the last did? It seems to be set up that way.
 
It was a good film. As was Casino Royale.

But it wasn't a Bond film. I expected OTT action, macho yet smooth charisma, gadgets and slickness. You don't need a film to be as dumb as Die Another Day to have that. There has to be a happy medium. QoS missed it.

This film could have been any other film without the Bond name. And I don't like that. The retention of M was the only redeeming feature of a Bond film.
 
Nitefly said:
It was a good film. As was Casino Royale.

But it wasn't a Bond film. I expected OTT action, macho yet smooth charisma, gadgets and slickness. You don't need a film to be as dumb as Die Another Day to have that. There has to be a happy medium. QoS missed it.

This film could have been any other film without the Bond name. And I don't like that. The retention of M was the only redeeming feature of a Bond film.
Click to expand...

Welcome to 2006, Bond never was all about girls and gadgets, you've just been conditioned by recent films.
 
Last edited:
Tombo said:
Welcome to 2006, Bond never was all about girls and gadgets, you've just been conditioned by recent films.
Click to expand...
It wasn't, you are right. However, they are rightly what I would expect in a bond film. Or its just an 'franchiseless' film - enjoyable in its own right. But its not bond.

We need something 1/3 QoS, 2/3 Goldeneye.

The scales never needed to be tipped so far this way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom