Bond 22 - Quantum of Solace

[roundshort]

So check this out. I was just given the opportunity to help sponsor a charity event at Sony Pictures. I would host a Martini Bar (the guy who owns the winery I work for also makes a high end Gin) for a prescreening of the new Bond Movie. Then we go to a private dinner with my wines. Pretty cool! If I agree to it, I will let you all know how the movie is!

[The Man]

So check this out. I was just given the opportunity to help sponsor a charity event at Sony Pictures. I would host a Martini Bar (the guy who owns the winery I work for also makes a high end Gin) for a prescreening of the new Bond Movie. Then we go to a private dinner with my wines. Pretty cool! If I agree to it, I will let you all know how the movie is!

When is this, Roundy..?

[roundshort]

Not sure on the det's yet. Working on it now. Sounds pretty cool though. I will know a lot more next week.

[The Man]

Not sure on the det's yet. Working on it now. Sounds pretty cool though. I will know a lot more next week.

Good man...:up:

[The Man]

Behind the scenes with the lovely Olga...*

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ZCCokIbDVw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ZCCokIbDVw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



*Great practical snippets of the boat chase, too...

[Joe Brody]

Not sure on the det's yet. Working on it now. Sounds pretty cool though. I will know a lot more next week.

Ah, you wear your suit with such disdain.

[Niteshade007]

Behind the scenes with the lovely Olga...*

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ZCCokIbDVw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ZCCokIbDVw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



*Great practical snippets of the boat chase, too...

Cool vid. But femme fatale? She seems more like the heroine to me.

Eh, we'll see soon enough.

[agentsands77]

Cool vid. But femme fatale? She seems more like the heroine to me.
Heroine? Why do you say that?

I don't see anything heroic about her character. She's not a baddie, strictly speaking, but she is an icy, cold, selfish gal with a lust for revenge.

[The Man]

<object width="450" height="274"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/6826"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/6826" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="450" height="274" allowFullScreen="true"></embed></object>

[Niteshade007]

Heroine? Why do you say that?

I don't see anything heroic about her character. She's not a baddie, strictly speaking, but she is an icy, cold, selfish gal with a lust for revenge.

Yeah, but she's kind of got the whole Domino thing going on from Thunderball. I don't view her character as a femme fatale.

[The Man]

http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?itemid=6827&t=mi6&s=news

Sony Pictures Home Entertainment confirmed to a Spanish fansite that the (first) DVD and Blu-Ray release of the 22nd James Bond adventure "Quantum of Solace" is scheduled for March 2009.

Don't hang around, do they..?

[IndyJess]

It's not too late. Please replace Alicia Key's horrible theme song. :down:

[The Man]

It's not too late. Please replace Alicia Key's horrible theme song. :down:

Well, David Arnold is still doing his best...

<a href="http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=44293739">Quantum Of Solace Music Exclusive</a><br/><object width="425px" height="360px" ><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"/><param name="movie" value="http://mediaservices.myspace.com/services/media/embed.aspx/m=44293739,t=1,mt=video"/><embed src="http://mediaservices.myspace.com/services/media/embed.aspx/m=44293739,t=1,mt=video" width="425" height="360" allowFullScreen="true" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object>

[The Man]

Press Preview: Spoilers Ahoy...

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38698

The scene quickly transitions to a car chase, guns a-blazing, through a series of tunnels. A title card then tells us the action is moving to Siena, Italy, where Bond, M, and a couple of other agents are interrogating Mr. White, the man Bond captured at the end of CASINO ROYALE. He looks like he's been a tad bit tortured. This is similar to the sequence in the trailer. He's laughing at them and saying that the first thing Bond needs to realize is that "we have people everywhere." What we don't see in the trailer is the next line Mr. White delivers to one of the unknown figures in the room: "Am I right?" Suddenly a gun battle erupts and seems to lead Bond and whoever is shooting at him into a foot chase in a sewer system.

[Indy_Chic]

Press Preview: Spoilers Ahoy...

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38698


Ahh, do I love spoilers! They sound pretty awesome.:cool:

[The Man]

Ahh, do I love spoilers! They sound pretty awesome.:cool:

You're in Australia, right? When is it due to open over there? It premiers on October 31st in this part of Europe...

[The Man]

http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?itemid=6838&t=mi6&s=news

In Quantum of Solace, he is very much the same Bond, and the film is a direct sequel to Casino Royale. 'It begins right after the other one ended, with Bond interrogating Mr White,' he says. 'There was unfinished business and it was important to me that we finish it off. I mean, here's this guy who never loses, never loses at cards, never loses at life, he's always at the top of his game and will kill anybody who gets in his way. Along comes a woman who dupes him. As far as he's concerned, she was only in it for the money, for ulterior motives, and it just didn't seem right to leave that hanging there. So it's a revenge-led movie.'

Once again, Craig was heavily involved in the stunt sequences. 'I really think it makes a huge difference,' he says. 'No matter how good the CGI is, however good the double is, if the audience can see it's you, and they have that moment of, "F*** me, it's him!" they get more involved in the movie. So then it comes down to getting the balls to do it. I'm not good with heights. I'm not an athlete, although I've always enjoyed keeping fit in between bouts of minor alcoholism. So it's a big challenge. You're up there on top of a building and it's a long way down, and the explosion is going to go off, and you have to go on "Action" and look cool while you're doing it. I go for it because I'd be pissed off with myself in the future if I didn't. I'm 40 now and I can only give my body so much more punishment.'

[Indy_Chic]

You're in Australia, right? When is it due to open over there? It premiers on October 31st in this part of Europe...

You're lucky the film is released at the end of this month my friend! The premiere in Australia is November 15th according to Empire Magazine. So it will be a while until I see it. :eek:

[The Man]

You're lucky the film is released at the end of this month my friend! The premiere in Australia is November 15th according to Empire Magazine. So it will be a while until I see it. :eek:

Bummer. You must remain strong...

[The Man]

Cometh the coverage...

http://commanderbond.net/article/5623

As the theatrical release of Quantum of Solace gets closer and closer, you can bet that numerous television programs will be getting into the 007 spirit.

The South Bank Show
Wednesday, 22 October
Begins at 20:40 (ITV1)

Friday Night with Jonathan Ross
Friday, 24 October
Begins at 22:35 (BBC1)

Movie Special: Quantum of Solace
Sunday, 26 October
Begins at 22:30 (Sky 2)

Film 2008: Quantum of Solace Special
Tuesday, 28 October
Begins at 21:25 (BBC1)

Bond: The Making of Quantum of Solace
Friday, 31 October
Begins at 21:45 (ITV1)

[The Man]

http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?itemid=6855&t=mi6&s=news

"Quantum of Solace" has officially received its classification for exhibition in UK cinemas - 12A. The news will come as no surprise to MI6 readers, as it was reported last month that the film would likely receive this rating. The film has already received its PG-13 rating in the USA.

The BBFC statement on the classification reads:
This film was originally seen by the BBFC in an unfinished version, for advice as to the film's suitability at '12A'. The BBFC advised the company that the film would most likely receive a '12A' as it was, but that care should be taken when finishing the film not to increase the intensity of certain scenes. When the completed version of the film was submitted for classification, reductions to one of those scenes had been made and the film was passed '12A' without cuts.

[The Man]

First official clip...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/omhnXoiJufg&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/omhnXoiJufg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[The Man]

Another newbie...

<object width="425" height="339"><param name="movie" value="http://www.movieweb.com/v/V08J4lmstuDJVY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.movieweb.com/v/V08J4lmstuDJVY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="339"></embed></object>

[The Man]

Camille: The Bond Girl Diaries...

PART I
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/kgK6krIYtbs&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/kgK6krIYtbs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

PART II
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P8sdOAqLGrk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P8sdOAqLGrk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

PART III
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AqdPiXXC8iE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AqdPiXXC8iE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[The Man]

Bond and Camille do business...*

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9l4qErF8fGk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9l4qErF8fGk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>





*No, nothing saucy...

[The Man]

TV Spot: No. 3

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Cw2ybg9qD-Y&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Cw2ybg9qD-Y&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[The Man]

Bond breaks up a clandestine chit-chat...


<embed src="http://services.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f8/1348426473" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1861218946&playerId=1348426473&viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://console.brightcove.com/services/amfgateway&servicesURL=http://services.brightcove.com/services&cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&domain=embed&autoStart=false&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>

[Dr.Sartorius]

I love that last clip. Very reminiscent of Goldfinger.

[The Man]

I love that last clip. Very reminiscent of Goldfinger.

It is, yes...

Times Online have seen it...

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/london_film_festival/article4965892.ece

James Bond is back, and this time it’s mighty personal. Daniel Craig’s craggy agent picks up exactly where he left off in another bruising thriller that leaves you feeling both drained and exhilarated.

There are hand-to-hand fights that make your eyes water and old-school stunts involving motorbikes, speedboats, jet fighters and expensive cars that give you whiplash just looking at them. Really, nobody does it better than the new 007.

What makes Marc Forster’s film such an intriguing watch is that this is the first of the 22 Bond movies where the plot flows organically from the last instalment, and Quantum of Solace looks a far stronger picture for this rare continuity.

The director, Marc Forster, has absorbed the lucrative lessons discovered in Martin Campbell’s Casino Royale. He has also managed to pace his sequel much better. Royale felt slightly wheel-clamped by one too many longeurs. If anything, the crunching chase sequences in Quantum of Solace are even more magnificently dangerous. And the daredevil leaps and tumbles through glass roofs are just as sensational as the splintering high-speed pyrotechnics.

But it’s the amount of heartache and punishment that Craig’s new Bond absorbs that makes him look so right for our times.

Bond is no longer a work in progress. He is now the cruel, finished article.

4/5

:up: :up: :up::up:

[The Man]

THE EMPIRE VERDICT (http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=134523)

[The Man]

HATER!!!*

http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/review/quantum-of-solace.php

Quantum Of Solace is a crushing disappointment. Try as you might, you'll be unable to invest in any of the characters – now Bond's heart has been broken, it's like nothing ever changed and the character exists simply to get to the next location and car chase and gun fight. It's a perfectly average action film, certainly better than the last few Brosnan outings. But when Casino Royale set the bar so high, it's not acceptable for a follow-up to simply stroll under it. Once again, Bond finds himself at a cross-roads, standing still, without direction. So... what now?



*Let's hope we don't end up agreeing with this...

[The Man]

TV Spot: No. 4

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LhJNFMXBr3s&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LhJNFMXBr3s&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Dr.Sartorius]

I'm starting to see QoS commercials on TV like crazy now.

[The Man]

I'm starting to see QoS commercials on TV like crazy now.

Yeah, the 60-second slots are getting serious airtime on U.K. TV...

More behind-the-scenes shenanigans...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/K3prKppSPZY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/K3prKppSPZY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[agentsands77]

GQ review (http://www.gqmagazine.co.uk/Style/CoolStuff/details.asp?cat=Quantum%20Of%20Solace&group=films&id=1126):

Quantum Of Solace

GQ.COM rating: ****

Casino Royale saw Bond rebooted – Bourne again, if you will. And at the outset of Quantum Of Solace you’d be forgiven for forgetting that you’re watching 007 and not the absent-minded assassin: car chases, rooftop pursuits, hand-to-hand combat. Indeed, the hand of Dan Bradley, stunt supremo on the Bourne trilogy, is immediately apparent. If you can’t beat them, convince their expert on beating people up to join you.

Except that the car being thrashed in the thrilling opening isn’t a Lada; it’s a full-throated Aston Martin. The setting isn’t a drab Eastern Bloc city; it’s scenic Lake Garda. And as Bond (Daniel Craig, in his second outing) swells his MI6 expense account with another wreck before nonchalantly exiting, as unruffled as the lining of his Tom Ford suit, we’re reminded why nobody does it better. Just as Ian Fleming’s novels transported a rationed post-WWII public to a world of fine dining, international travel and sports cars, so today’s credit-crunched audience is whisked to Italy, Haiti, Austria, Bolivia and Russia, with Bond flying first class and gleefully blowing his cover in order to check himself into the best hotel in town. Who wants grey realism when you can have brilliant escapism?

Although the title borrows from a Fleming short story, the plot is original, picking up minutes after Casino Royale left off. Le Chiffre’s money trail leads Bond to Dominic Greene (Mathieu Almaric) and the mysterious Quantum organisation, a 21st-century SPECTRE, which plots to monopolise “the world’s most precious resource”. In bed with corrupt regimes and the CIA, and with “people everywhere”, the oily Greene slowly turns everyone against Bond, who finds himself increasingly out in the cold as he pursues his personal agenda – revenge for Vesper Lynd’s death – from one sun-drenched exotic locale to the next, accompanied by an equally vengeful Camille (Olga Kurylenko).

Craig’s Bond is still a “blunt instrument”, but he also has flashes of rapier wit and charm, enticing Agent Fields (Gemma Arterton) into his hotel suite with delightful matter-of-factness. Director Marc Forster meanwhile brings a visual artistry uncommon to Bond – a foot pursuit and gunfight are paralleled with Siena’s Palio horserace and a Puccini opera respectively – and the very occasional pause for breath (this is the shortest instalment yet) gives Craig chance to flex his acting chops rather than his much-publicised muscles, thereby maintaining the film’s emotional heart. OK, so the pace could be a little less breakneck, the camera work less kinetic, and a smidgeon more exposition wouldn’t go amiss. Ultimately though, Quantum follows Casino Royale in reinstating the Bond supremacy. Over to you, Mr Webb.

[The Man]

<object width="450" height="212"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/7012"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/7012" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" allowscriptaccess="always" width="450" height="212"></embed></object>

<object width="450" height="212"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/7013"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/7013" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" allowscriptaccess="always" width="450" height="212"></embed></object>

<object width="450" height="212"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/7016"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emb/7016" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" allowscriptaccess="always" width="450" height="212"></embed></object>

[The Man]

Don't forget...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv-entertainment/tv/todays-tv/2008/10/22/we-love-factual-james-bond-the-south-bank-show-itv1-10-40pm-115875-20827927/

Tonight - James Bond: The South Bank Show, ITV1, 10.40pm

[Sankara]

I just saw the new Bond-Movie in Hamburg. First of all.... I really like Craig as Bond and I really like "Casino Royale". The new Bond-Movie got a lot of action... in my opinion a little bit to much action. The Bond-Girl (Vesper) and the Villain (Le Chiffre) were much better in "Casino Royale". The new ones are okay but nothing great.

I gave 3,5 of 5 Stars. Fast, very entertaining... but I missed the Bond-Flair.

Of course it's much better than "Skull"!

The Bond Movies are nothing against "Indy 1 - 3". But every single Bond Movie is much better than "Skull". Okay... "Octo*****" and "Moonrake" are not much better... ;)

[The Man]

I just saw the new Bond-Movie in Hamburg. First of all.... I really like Craig as Bond and I really like "Casino Royale". The new Bond-Movie got a lot of action... in my opinion a little bit to much action. The Bond-Girl (Vesper) and the Villain (Le Chiffre) were much better in "Casino Royale". The new ones are okay but nothing great.

I gave 3,5 of 5 Stars. Fast, very entertaining... but I missed the Bond-Flair.

Of course it's much better than "Skull"!

The Bond Movies are nothing against "Indy 1 - 3". But every single Bond Movie is much better than "Skull". Okay... "Octo*****" and "Moonrake" are not much better... ;)

Any hint of what direction the next movie may be taking..?

[Sankara]

@the man
Maybe... one of the bad guys is still alive at the end.

[Niteshade007]

I heard a rumor...

That Camille, the main Bond Girl dies, is that true?

[agentsands77]

I heard a rumor...

That Camille, the main Bond Girl dies, is that true?
It's false.

[agentsands77]

The Bond Movies are nothing against "Indy 1 - 3".
I disagree. Depends on the Bond movie, but Bond at the top of his game is definitely a match for RAIDERS, while TEMPLE and CRUSADE are decidedly inferior to a great many Bond flicks.

[The Man]

@the man
Maybe... one of the bad guys is still alive at the end.

I'd love it to be Mr. White...

http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn22/baldamrish/3634819_std.jpg
"You're testing my patience now..."

[The Man]

THE TOTAL FILM VERDICT (http://www.totalfilm.com/reviews/cinema/quantum-of-solace)

[TheLastCrusader]

Total Film is not a very good film magazine IMO.

[The Man]

Total Film is not a very good film magazine IMO.

No, I'm not fond of it either, but I bought the new issue yesterday to get the free Quantum Of Solace mousemat...

[The Man]

New French one-sheets...

http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn22/baldamrish/quantum1.jpg?t=1224868509

http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn22/baldamrish/quantum2.jpg?t=1224868563

http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn22/baldamrish/quantum3.jpg?t=1224868604

[Niteshade007]

I like that first French one a lot better than the one we got. There just have not been good posters for this film.

[AndyLGR]

I heard a review today on BBC radio here in the UK and the guy ripped the film to bits. Not as good as Casino Royale, no sense of danger, couldnt empathise with the characters, poor story.....

[agentsands77]

I heard a review today on BBC radio here in the UK and the guy ripped the film to bits. Not as good as Casino Royale, no sense of danger, couldnt empathise with the characters, poor story.....
Yeah, the BBC radio guy disliked it. But then again, he also disliked THE DARK KNIGHT.

[Dr. Wolfwood]

Yeah, the BBC radio guy disliked it. But then again, he also disliked THE DARK KNIGHT.
Sounds like a guy to listen to. Dark Knight was one of the most incoherent and meaningless movies I've seen in a long time (many scenes just stop without leading anywhere, such as Joker crashing the big fund raising party, and you never care about the fates of any of the characters). The only thing the movie did well was being a dark tale about Batman, but unfortunately the tale itself wasn't much to look at.

I just hope that Quantum of Solace isn't quite that bad of a sequel...

[The Man]

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article5001623.ece

Now, with the second film in the relaunch of the franchise, they must face a new question — is Quantum of Solace the most boring Bond film ever?

The screenplay, by Paul Haggis (Crash), Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, is at times incomprehensible.

In place of glamour, we get a spurious grit; instead of style, we get product placement; in place of fantasy, we get a redundant and silly realism. Craig makes an attractive corpse, but Bond is dead.

Fair to suggest that opinions are decidedly mixed on this one...

[Sankara]

No, the new Bond-Movie is NOT boring.There is a lot of action in it... but you don't really care about the charscters.

[The Man]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv-entertainment/film/2008/10/26/film-of-the-week-quantum-of-solace-115875-20841686/

With an electrifying Daniel Craig now firmly established as everyone's favourite British spy, the film-makers take Bond into a 21st Century where danger to the environment is the real threat.

Quantum of Solace confirms the strength of the Bond franchise... I can't wait to watch it again!

A brilliant, breathless action romp. Daniel Craig is electrifying.

[Niteshade007]

So apparently you love it or hate it.

[The Man]

I'd love to see an eventual re-edit with Quantum attached directly to the end of Royale...

[The Man]

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/entertainment/film/article52612.ece

Amid the mound of fair-to-middling knee-jerk “first” reviews and grumbling by twerps, snobs and bloggers from www. noonereadsmywebsite.com, it’s vital to point out that Quantum of Solace is no Casino Royale.

But it’s still top-notch Bond—falling comfortably into the all-time top seven films of the series, alongside Casino, Russia, No, Eye, and two other Moore-free episodes of your own choosing.

[The Man]

Reminder...*

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcone/listings/programme.shtml?day=today&service_id=4223&filename=20081028/20081028_2325_4223_5889_40

Film 2008 with Jonathan Ross
Tue 28 Oct, 11:25 pm - 12:05 am 40mins

With privileged access to the cast and crew, Jonathan Ross provides the lowdown on return of James Bond in Quantum of Solace. On set at 007's spiritual home, he meets the actor who's made the role his own, Daniel Craig, plus Mathieu Almaric, who plays Bond's nemesis, and director Marc Forster.




*I'm in no way fond of Wossy, but this could be terrific. Their Casino Royale special was gold...

[The Man]

Bond bows tonight...

http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/bond_22_premiere_preview.php3?t=qos&s=qos&id=02059

As the hype to the 22nd James Bond film "Quantum of Solace" builds, so do the lines of fans waiting in Leicester Square to secure a prime spot for the world premiere tonight. Huge crowds were expected for the world premiere, and the security teams were not disappointed as hundreds of fans formed lines around the square before noon. The premiere kicks off at 6pm.

[The Man]

THE C.H.U.D. VERDICT (http://chud.com/articles/articles/16848/1/REVIEW-QUANTUM-OF-SOLACE/Page1.html)

[The Man]

Well, it's out over here, though I won't get to see it until next week. Balls. Who plans to catch it today..?

[The Magic Rat]

Yeah, I don't know what to think. It's certainly lowered my expectations after all of the reviews came out. It sounds like it's just Bourne part 5 now, which is a shame.

And yeah, I gotta say I thought The Dark Knight is overrated beyond belief. It's okay, but my God.

[The Man]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38947

Daniel Craig IS James Bond. No, that’s not a statement of fact for those five people still living under a rock that haven’t heard about Casino Royale. Nor is it some kitschy cool intro to a faux trailer to get you all ramped up. No. It is my new answer to that age old question “Who is your favorite James Bond?” Look, I love the living hell out of Connery and I pretty much grew up on Roger Moore’s campy take on the character. But no one, NO ONE has brought the depth, cool callousness and sheer brutality to Bond that Craig does. He’s the James Bond we’ve been waiting for. And his two films with the mantle have rebooted the series in a way we’ve wanted for quite some time.

Oh, and while I’m talking about how ridiculously cool Daniel Craig is, I might as well mention how positively awesome Quantum of Solace is.

And finally, one of the greatest elements of the new Bond is the fact that this is one continuing story with simply a number of radically different missions. Quantum of Solace has a resolution, but Bond never single-handedly brings down a multi-nation criminal organization. There’s no big round-up or magical island raid to wrap things up neatly. If you’re paying attention you’ll notice that there’s more to do and while it doesn’t end on a cliffhanger (nor leaves you wanting), you have a very solid idea of what the third film will no doubt be about – if only somewhat.

Sure Bond is still the cocksure, brazen misogynist we’ve all come to know and love. They’ve just made it believable. He’s not a Saturday morning cartoon anymore. Those days are gone. I love those old movies. They are very much a wonderful product of their time. But times have changed. And it was time for a new, improved Bond. Daniel Craig is that Bond. And after Quantum of Solace he is officially my favorite.

[The Golden Idol]

So apparently you love it or hate it.

Sounds like the early reviews of KOTCS...

[Kingsley]

Sounds like the early reviews of KOTCS...
Hope to be between the lovers this time...

[Rhys135]

Saw it at the the cinema last night. Disappointing is what is is mainly. Craig is still Bond but his performance isn't quite to the same level as it was in CR. There are a lot of action scene's but they are mostly delivered in small dose's and are not as memorable as CR's action. Bond doesn't do anything spectacular doing these and the majority of them are shot with a 'shaky' cam making them dificult to watch and I got the feeling I had missed half the action in some scene's. Story is allright for what it is and quite in-depth, but the back-story of one of the Bond girls is pointless and embarassing imo. The editing wasn't good either and I felt like the director was trying to make an "art" film at times, and it should of had been longer as they were squeezing way to many things into some scenes. Could have done with a bit more humour and a better script aswell.

When I came out of CR I wanted to watch it again immediatley and had many favourite scene's that I liked to discussed and reminisce about. Won't be in a rush to watch this one again.

[caats]

Sounds like a guy to listen to. Dark Knight was one of the most incoherent and meaningless movies I've seen in a long time (many scenes just stop without leading anywhere, such as Joker crashing the big fund raising party, and you never care about the fates of any of the characters). The only thing the movie did well was being a dark tale about Batman, but unfortunately the tale itself wasn't much to look at.

I just hope that Quantum of Solace isn't quite that bad of a sequel...

that was the only odd moment in the movie for me, but nolan obviously likes the viewers to connect the dots themselves. other than that i disagree totally.

[The Man]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i63073cda9189a10c5bcd9c06275a9a45

James Bond jolted the international boxoffice during the weekend as Sony/MGM's "Quantum of Solace," the 22nd installment in the 007 franchise launching in only three overseas markets, drew a spectacular $38.6 million from 2,123 screens and claimed the No. 1 spot easily.

Biggest by far of the three territories played by the latest Bond movie was the production's home base, the U.K., where "Quantum" dominated with $25.3 million from 1,150 situations for a whopping $22,000 per-screen average. It was the biggest three-day opening for any film in the U.K., surpassing by 35% the market opening of 2006's Bond installment "Casino Royale," according to Mark Zucker, Sony's president of international distribution.

[westford]

Biggest by far of the three territories played by the latest Bond movie was the production's home base, the U.K., where "Quantum" dominated with $25.3 million from 1,150 situations for a whopping $22,000 per-screen average. It was the biggest three-day opening for any film in the U.K., surpassing by 35% the market opening of 2006's Bond installment "Casino Royale," according to Mark Zucker, Sony's president of international distribution.
Our local cinema had a huge choice of movies showing on Friday night - Quantum of Solace or High School Musical 3... :rolleyes: We gave watching a film a miss, but is it any wonder Bond is doing well in the UK with that kind of competition?

[Niteshade007]

Well, to be fair, High School Musical is HUGE in America at least. It's been No. 1 at the Box Office for two weeks, and the merchandising for the movies is ridiculous.

Mostly, it's popular with girls, ranging anywhere from 4 to into their 20s.

[The Man]

Just caught an afternoon show. Good. Very good, indeed. Not as classically styled as Royale, but well shot and paced in its own right. It doesn't feel all that much shorter than the average Bond...

The Vesper angle is pretty much resolved by the end, while Bond is armed with more - as yet unknown - information regarding Quantum...

Craig's show is only just beginning to roll...:up:

[Indy_Chic]

Just caught an afternoon show. Good. Very good, indeed. Not as classically styled as Royale, but well shot and paced in its own right. It doesn't feel all that much shorter than the average Bond...

The Vesper angle is pretty much resolved by the end, while Bond is armed with more - as yet unknown - information regarding Quantum...

Craig's show is only just beginning to roll...:up:


Sounds great! The film opens here in Australia this week.... not long til the Daniel Craig drooling commences. :p

[AndyLGR]

I saw it tonight.

I thought the story was weak and didnt hold the movie together particularly well. It was all a bit confusing and muddled as to what the aim of the organisation was.

There were plenty of action scenes in there and it crammed quite a few action scenes in to the first half an hour without their actually being much story linking them together.

I always wonder what the people who made it were thinking when they watched the movie after it had been put together. Did anyone notice the story was a bit crap?

Even though the ending was a bit flat, especially the final showdown, I liked the resolution of the Vespa story.

It'll be interesting to see where they go with the next one, will they use the same organisation or something different? Also will they start to integrate some of the previous Bond gimmicks in there - like Moneypenny , Q or gadgets? I get the impression from interviews with Daniel Craig that this will happen as the films go on.

To me the Bond films now have themselves firmly in the realm of the gritty realism and action that we have seen in Bond -wannabes like Bourne. If this film does not do well then it might be difficult to change the style around, yet in the same breath if this film does well then it may be equally difficult to start to add a few of familar Bond film items that we've seen in the past. Defintiely the future of the Bond franchise doesnt look bland or uninteresting as it did with Moore or Brosnan.

Daniel Craig was excellent too.

[MaxPhactor23]

I particularly enjoyed it. I vastly preferred it to the overrated Casino Royale actually.

[caats]

i'm seeing it tonight. my expectations aren't too high, but we'll see. my friend thought it was alright. it actually got lower ratings than Skull. ha.

[Forbidden Eye]

Opening day gross has been about $27 million.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/days/?page=open&p.htm

I should be seeing this something very soon. I don't have my hopes up to be better or even in the same league as Casino Royale, but should be a fun ride.

[agentsands77]

Here's my review:

The cinematic Bond franchise is something of a dinosaur. It's been around for close to 50 years, and now spans a massive total of 22 films. But even though you'd suspect Bond had finally run out of air, James Bond is still at the top of his game. 2006's back-to-basics, character-driven Casino Royale showed that Bond had plenty of previously untapped resources, and while not quite as coherent or groundbreaking, Quantum of Solace continues the trend by pushing Bond as a character.

Quantum of Solace picks up literally ten minutes or so after Casino Royale left off, thrusting us into the middle of a rollicking car chase through the Italian countryside. It's a stunning set-piece, with breakneck editing and stuntwork, and lets you know that this Bond means business.

Bond's out for some closure (hence the title, which essentially translates to "a measure of comfort") after the death of the love of his life, Vesper Lynd, in Casino Royale. But as much as Quantum of Solace presents a personal mission for Bond, it's not just a vendetta. In a terse conversation with his superior, "M" (played with great charm by Dame Judi Dench), Bond claims, "I'm motivated by my duty," and he means it.

Here, Craig cements his position as the best Bond actor the series has ever had. With his piercing blue eyes and rugged face, he brings a heretofore unseen level of weight to the character, while maintaining the charm, style, and elegance that made the character an icon. Never before has Bond been so interesting. But Craig's not only the "actor's Bond," but the ultimate "action Bond," as well, with his toned physique and relentless physicality in the action scenes. Craig's Bond tears through his foes like a twister through a Kansas barn.

And along the way, Bond bumps into a variety of interesting faces. The foe this time out is Dominic Greene, played with creepy malice by The Diving Bell and the Butterfly's Matthieu Amalric. With his short stature and odd eyes, he's less the cat-stroking supervillain and more of the slimy businessman, a villain of our times. Greene's girlfriend is the exotic Camille (Hitman's Olga Kurylenko), who will be owned by nobody and has an agenda of her own. Giancarlo Giannini and Jeffrey Wright return from Casino Royale as Bond's allies Rene Mathis and Felix Leiter, respectively, and Gemma Arterton makes a brief, but amusing, appearance as Agent Fields (watch the end credits for her humorous first name).

The locations are dazzling, from the bowels, streets, and rootops of Siena, Italy, to a floating opera stage in Bregenz, Austria, to the stark and dusty deserts of South America. They're all captured beautifully, thanks to the sensibilities of director Marc Forster (Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, Stranger Than Fiction). Forster's vision hearkens back to the Bond films of yore while retaining a decidedly contemporary edge, from Roberto Schaefer's elegant cinematography to Dennis Gassner's production design. If nothing else, Quantum of Solace is a remarkably pretty film.

But thankfully, it's not just a soulless vehicle. While Dominic Greene's plot, which has more than a few echoes of Roman Polanski's Chinatown, might not be the most engaging storyline in Bond history, it provides an adequate backdrop for Bond's development as a character. There are some terrific character moments sprinkled throughout, including a brief glimpse of a drunk, brooding Bond (a nice wink at the Bond of Ian Fleming's novels) and a grim homage to Goldfinger.

If there is any significant problem with Quantum of Solace, it's that, even at its brisk 106 minutes, it's too long. There are at least two action sequences that should have been excised at the script stage (a rather pedestrian boat chase and a dull airplane dogfight), but they're not enough to sink the film. Quantum of Solace is a great ride, and demonstrates that Bond isn't going out of style anytime soon.

[Blue Jay]

i was really disappointed with this movie.

The story was alright, i guess. But this was not always the strong part in the Bond franchise, see Live and let die or Octo***** or Moonraker, but these are among my favorite movies.

But i absolutely did not like Foster's execution, I loved his other works like Finding Neverland, Stranger Than Fiction and The Kiterunner, though.

The action scenes were cut so fast and i wasn't really able to follow the action at most of the times.
I did not have fun at all and i was annoyed and lost interest pretty fast.

The whole beginning of the movie was just ****** up.

I liked how Foster introduced the locations, that was just a great idea or the hommage to Goldfinger.

The opening titles seemed strangely edited to me. I listened to the Bond song many times since it came out and it felt like they were using a shortened version with missing bits and pieces.

The actors were alright. I did not like Craig as Bond as much as i liked him in Casino Royale.

The movie felt somehow incomplete, more like an episode of a tv show and the conclusion will come after the ads are over ^^

I did not like how technology is shown in this movie, like Ms totally digital office, this seemed more like Star Trek to me and if they try to make the new Bonds more serious, i am fine with it - I really loved Casino Royale - but this was just to silly for my taste and it seemed totally out of place in this movie. Strangely i wouldn't have minded it in a Bond movie with Roger Moore, that doesn't take itself too seriously.

But this is my opinion and i hope that you all can enjoy it ^^

On another note, just saw KotCS again and i must say, that i just love these movies. I think i loved it even more this time, after watching QoS.
It reminded me how good old fashioned action/adventure movie making can be. The action in Indy 4 was just perfectly staged and executed, at least for me.

So that was my 2 cents. Have fun at the movies :up:


Foster is otherwise a great director, but i think he should keep his hands of action movies.

[Webley]

Do thay have Q in this one?

That was one thing I thought sucked about the last one no Q.

[The Golden Idol]

Do thay have Q in this one?

That was one thing I thought sucked about the last one no Q.

Nope.

ten characters

[Webley]

Nope.

ten characters

Thats to bad I think you cant have a 007 move with out Q.

What do you meen by ten characters

[The Golden Idol]

What do you meen by ten characters

Every post has a requirement to have at least ten characters. All I wanted to say is "Nope" so I typed in "ten characters" to make my response longer so that I'd be able to post it.

[The Magic Rat]

I was really, really let down with this one.

The story was thin and almost unnecessary. The CIA, the idea of hoarding water, none of it ever played out. The villain was hardly connected.

The action was really, really cool. Except that it failed to let you know what was going on. It was so shaky and had so many abrupt cuts that it was extremely difficult to follow at some points.

It really did feel like Bourne lite. I was disappointed, Casino Royale was sooooo good and this, at least to me, is in the bottom 1/4 of Bond flicks.

Side note, I was surprised at the amount of violence in this one.

Craig is still a great Bond, though.

[caats]

i thought it was ok. it was the story that was weak. lots of good Bond moments. i'm not "disappointed" cause i didn't have much invested. look forward to the next one. what sucked is the trailers, NO WATCHMEN, NO STAR TREK. BSSS

[roundshort]

loved it! I love the fact that they have taken "what the bad guys want" as a Macguffen (sp?) Lets face it, it doesn't matter that they want. We know it is something awful that will hurt or destroy the world. Bond has to stop them. He does it outside the rules . . . We all know the basic plot. I was let down by the lack of bond girls, but was glad to see less product placements. You really had to look to see the Bollinger champagne. I really thought product placements were getting out of hand.

I am so digging the fact that this had no gadgets. The opening car chase was one of the best I have seen, and the action was great.

No complaints, at all. I probably still like OHMSS, CR, and GF better, but this is number 4 or 5. Wish it had skiing.

[The Stranger]

Ok, so, I've finally seen the film a couple days ago. And, well...

I think it's the film of the year. At least, the "film you would go at the theater for" of the year.

First of all, I can't sincerely see why A LOT of people seemed so disappointed with the plot. Before going to see the film I had read some spoiler-free reviews of it and the great majority of them stated that the story was really not well developed and that at times it felt almost incomprehensible. :confused:

About this, I've got to say I personally entered the theater knowing absolutely anything about the plot (I mean that I hadn't followed the making-of videos, I hadn't watched any featurettes, I hadn't read anything about it and so on... thus I didn't have any clues) and to me the movie simply ended up being crystal clear. I can't help but think the story has been masterfully handled in this one.

Daniel Craig was fantastic, even better than he was on the first installment. Vengeance made his James Bond rude, mercyless and even colder than he ever was on "Casino Royale".
Other acting performances were good to me, but as always I'm referring to the italian dubbed version of the film, so it is possible that some of the actors earned charisma and/or credibility in the voice dubbing process... I don't know...
Praise to Giancarlo Giannini, our italian representative in the cast. :) I think his scenes are some of the most touching of the entire film and really help to develop the character of James Bond, in his humanity.
In any case I thought Judi Dench was the real shining star of this film, besides Daniel. As the plot evolved, you could clearly feel the inner conflict her character was forced to face. To trust Bond?? Or not to?? He is the number 1 of the MI6, yes... but he is also enraged and almost blinded by his anger, after all...

Marc Forster's work as the director was fantastic, in my opinion. Some of the shots were incredibly suggestive and also managed to perfectly capture the classic old-style feeling of the locations. The action sequences, if confused, were also extremely, extremely effective.

And in the end, special mention to the writers, who were capable of condensing a perfect character development and some really great dialogues in the shortest Bond movie in history. :up: :up:

NOTE: yes, I know... I wrote that "Quantum" is the film of the year even if this year I actually missed one of the big-screen hits 'cause I didn't go to see "The Dark Knight". But... I can assume that, being it a mere superhero film, and being it about Batman, it just doesn't have any minimal chance of being better than "Quantum of Solace". I still think "Spider Man 2" is the best superhero movie ever, especially since our dear Peter Parker is the emotionally deepest superhero character of all time, and, with his second film, director Sam Raimi neatly surpassed himself. So, I guess, no matter how well Nolan could have handled Batman, I sincerely can't believe "The Dark Knight" could ever beat "Spider Man 2" to me, even if it turns out being actually great. And, well, since I consider "Spider Man 2" being inferior to "Casino Royale" while contemporary having found "Quantum" even better than it, I can easily predict that "The Dark Knight" won't be better than this new 007 movie. At least to me, guys. ;)

[caats]

haha. sorry but your opinion is kinda nullified if you haven't seen Dark Knight but are actively making assumptions about it. i mean...But... I can assume that, being it a mere superhero film, and being it about Batman, it just doesn't have any minimal chance of being better than "Quantum of Solace".

haha wtf is this a joke? maybe it's a joke.

[The Magic Rat]

haha. sorry but your opinion is kinda nullified if you haven't seen Dark Knight but are actively making assumptions about it. i mean...

haha wtf is this a joke? maybe it's a joke.


I'd hope so. Serioulsy, I think TDK is way overrated and I didn't care for QoS at all, but TDK was crafted much better. At least the direction was actually good.

[roundshort]

I'd hope so. Serioulsy, I think TDK is way overrated and I didn't care for QoS at all, but TDK was crafted much better. At least the direction was actually good.


MR, I agree. The story was so well told, that it didn't need to hit people over the head. the DK put me to sleep, twice. Not a huge fan of that one

[caats]

i don't think the story was well told at all in QoS. mainly for the first half. when the girl(olga kurylenko's character) was introduced, it was really difficult to follow. i was hoping this movie would go more into Quantum, but i guess they're saving that

[Lord_glavin]

MR, I agree. The story was so well told, that it didn't need to hit people over the head. the DK put me to sleep, twice. Not a huge fan of that one

I am also ashamed to say DK was the first time I fell asleep in a movie theater lol

but! I enjoyed Quantum of Solace, plot was there, action was good, my only problem is that it left a lot of loose ends, which bothers me with bond movies

not used to continuity lol

[Benraianajones]

I don't see why the gadget aspect has been totally tossed out the window though. Not all gadgets have to be out of this world and comical. Gadgets can be just as serious as they can comical.

I'll stick with Goldeneye.

[The Magic Rat]

I don't see why the gadget aspect has been totally tossed out the window though. Not all gadgets have to be out of this world and comical. Gadgets can be just as serious as they can comical.

I'll stick with Goldeneye.


That's one of the things that has bothered me the most about the "feel" of this franchise now. They have really changed who and what Bond is to compete with Bourne. Seriously, anyone who likes the new Bond has to admit that. During the hotel scene I was about ready for Bond to start beating the guy up with a book!

And Goldeneye is awesome. I really like Thunderball and From Russia with Love a lot, too.

[agentsands77]

I don't see why the gadget aspect has been totally tossed out the window though.
CASINO ROYALE did have some mild gadgetry. Like the travel-size defibrillator in Bond's Aston Martin, complete with hook up to MI6 HQ, or Bond's tracking device/phone hook-up.

And I do think it's just part of the push to get back to basics, I'd wager. It's hard to make gadgets that don't feel silly and/or overly convenient, especially in an era where an individual can own lots of incredible technology.

Now, the producers did suggest that we'll see some more subtle gadgetry in BOND 23, so I'll be interested to see what form that ends up taking. Probably something like the FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE briefcase.

[RaideroftheArk]

That's one of the things that has bothered me the most about the "feel" of this franchise now. They have really changed who and what Bond is to compete with Bourne. Seriously, anyone who likes the new Bond has to admit that. During the hotel scene I was about ready for Bond to start beating the guy up with a book!

And Goldeneye is awesome. I really like Thunderball and From Russia with Love a lot, too.

I hate to let you down but these new Bond movies are more of who and what Bond really is...as a matter of fact, if you read the Bond novels you will see how the Bourne movies are more like Bond than the other way around.

[Mike00spy]

They have really changed who and what Bond is to compete with Bourne.

Or they are just getting the character back to the books + making it more realistic. It is the natural order of things in the Bond universe.

[The Magic Rat]

I've read all of the books over the years. Hahaha, I am aware. But the movies really have never been what the books were, even in the beginning.

Generally speaking, people love the movies much more than the books. They know them better and are more fond of the campy action style Bond.

I'm just saying that are an incredible amount of similarities. I don't remember Bond being such a technical fighter in the books. I could be wrong, it's been years, but the fights are much more choreographed and articulate than I remember, thus feeling like a Bourne movie.

[RaideroftheArk]

I've read all of the books over the years. Hahaha, I am aware. But the movies really have never been what the books were, even in the beginning.

Generally speaking, people love the movies much more than the books. They know them better and are more fond of the campy action style Bond.

I'm just saying that are an incredible amount of similarities. I don't remember Bond being such a technical fighter in the books. I could be wrong, it's been years, but the fights are much more choreographed and articulate than I remember, thus feeling like a Bourne movie.

Ok Bond's fighting style is product of our modern age..

If they made a modern Bond movie where he puts up is Dukes to fight...people might have quite the chuckle over that... If Bond drove a classic 1964 Ashton Martin in the opening scene of QOS...although it would have been cool...it probably would have looked out of place unless the bad guys were driving equally dated cars.

Those type of things of course are going to be modified in the movies...but the Bond Character in general is a cold character WAY COLDER than Jason Bourne...like he has been portrayed in Casino Royale and QOS...that's what Bond is...not that campy action sterotype he has become over the past 40 years.

The newer movies have brought the real Bond character out as he should be.

[The Magic Rat]

Ok Bond's fighting style is product of our modern age..

If they made a modern Bond movie where he puts up is Dukes to fight...people might have quite the chuckle over that... If Bond drove a classic 1964 Ashton Martin in the opening scene of QOS...although it would have been cool...it probably would have looked out of place unless the bad guys were driving equally dated cars.

Those type of things of course are going to be modified in the movies...but the Bond Character in general is a cold character WAY COLDER than Jason Bourne...like he has been portrayed in Casino Royale and QOS...that's what Bond is...not that campy action sterotype he has become over the past 40 years.

The newer movies have brought the real Bond character out as he should be.



No, I think Daniel Craig is a great Bond. I enjoy it. I don't think he's exactly like the novelized Bond but I think he is closest and easily the second best behind Connery. I think the MOVIE is what is like Bourne. The direction/action is the most notable, but with the rooftop chase, the finale waiting in the dark-every time that stuff happened it just made me think of Bourne.

I kind of meant that as a whole the Bond franchise is becoming more of the Bourne style, not just Bond himself. I enjoy this type of Bond. So I should clarify by saying the movie style as a whole is what bothered me more than just Craig's Bond.

I'm not suggesting they make it like it's the 1960's, what I meant before is that it is remarkably similar to Bourne since the movie Bond was so action/campy at origin.

[Grizzlor]

I saw the film on Saturday. I am a Bond junky, and I liked a lot of what they did in the movie. I liked the pace, the dialogue (although there were no jokes), the intrigue, the sets, the action, the homages to past Bond films (there were several), etc. However, it was a somewhat dull and at times boring movie. The climax was incredibly lack luster and empty. The film just seemed very empty and incomplete to me. What really happened? They didn't tell us what Bond said to Vesper's ex-boyfriend? Had promise, but this one will go down with Tomorrow Never Dies and License to Kill as a real stinker.

[agentsands77]

The climax was incredibly lack luster and empty.
As an action scene, maybe. But it featured at least one wonderful character moment: Bond holding a shocked Camille, preparing to put her out of her misery in an interesting echo of the shower scene from CASINO ROYALE.

What really happened?
Bond grew and changed as a character in reacting to Vesper's death. At the end of QUANTUM OF SOLACE, he's been able to convert his grief over Vesper's death into a positive good. I think that's the best-handled thing about QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

They didn't tell us what Bond said to Vesper's ex-boyfriend?
I don't think we needed to know to get a sense of what the moment meant to Bond's character. The important thing wasn't his conversation with Yusef (whatever it entailed). The important thing was what preceded it, when Bond saved the Canadian gal from the same fate as Vesper.

[deckard24]

I just saw QOS the other night and I gotta be honest... it was a bit of a letdown!! The action was top-notch, but the editing was terrible and so incoherent you couldn't make out anything that was going on! It was like Paul Greengrass' style but ten times worse! The acting was okay and Craig was great as always, but enough is enough with the Bourne meets Bond angle, they're making him waaayyy too serious. Hopefully he'll lighten up a bit by the next installment, and they can in turn recapture some of the fun that was in Casino Royale. I don't mind Batman being dark and brooding, but James Bond needs to be a bit lighter. Grittiness is one thing, but they've now made him into a Bourne hybrid and that's a shame! I don't want to see invisible cars and other nonsense that turned these films into Austin Powers spoofs, but some of the fun, humor, and exotic lifestyle needs to be reinfused!

Overall it was enjoyable but forgettable, and that's too bad!:down:

[AndyLGR]

I think Daniel Criag is portraying Bond brilliantly. He definitely comes across as a cold character, just as the orignal Bond does in the novels. The killing of the guy on the balcony where he let him bleed to death by putting the knife in his thigh and also the scene in the burning building where he was going to shoot her instead of let her burn were perfect examples of this.

I've heard plenty of people moaning that this isnt the Bond they know, because there is no gadgets or jokes. Thats because most people have grown up watching Bond instead of reading Bond. Like it or not thats how the character of James Bond is perceived by most of the public. But having said that, its surely no coincidence that these last 2 movies look like they will become the top grossing films in the series, so the more gritty approach must be preferred over the camp Roger Moore style for instance.

If you read the novels then gadgets creep in as they proceed, but nowhere near as ridiculis as some of the gadgets seen in the movies but stuff like the car gadgets or the briefcase slowly come in. I think these Craig movies will go a similar way, they will slowly integrate more subtle gadgets in there as the films progress.

Although I was disappointed by the story of this new film and its overall drab tone, I thought the ending was very well handled. Saving the Canadian girl was a nice touch and in a way (for me) redeemed Vesper as she was actually duped into doing what he wanted.

[RaideroftheArk]

No, I think Daniel Craig is a great Bond. I enjoy it. I don't think he's exactly like the novelized Bond but I think he is closest and easily the second best behind Connery. I think the MOVIE is what is like Bourne. The direction/action is the most notable, but with the rooftop chase, the finale waiting in the dark-every time that stuff happened it just made me think of Bourne.

I kind of meant that as a whole the Bond franchise is becoming more of the Bourne style, not just Bond himself. I enjoy this type of Bond. So I should clarify by saying the movie style as a whole is what bothered me more than just Craig's Bond.

I'm not suggesting they make it like it's the 1960's, what I meant before is that it is remarkably similar to Bourne since the movie Bond was so action/campy at origin.

Ok fair enough...I'll admit you are right about the movie being like Bourne...which I didn't care for...all that fast paced, quick camera switching is more annoying that it is thrilling to look at...the fight scene in the bell tower could have been so cool if they just SHOWED the fight and the stunts.

That's what gets me...how do you as a director look at the finished product and go..."yeah, that's great looking." YOU CAN'T TELL WHAT'S GOING ON!

All that time, all the training they put into doing those stunts to see barely any of it seems like such a waist. The scenes were too fast and too tight.

Perhaps on multiple viewings it will be better...I watched a youtube clip on the car chase from the beginning...it didn't seem as bad as it did in the theater...but again...it was over so quickly.

I think back to movies like Bullit or the Seven Ups...those were car chases...these new directors need to watch the old classics to get a sense of realism or at least a style of camera work when capturing action sequences.

[caats]

Marc Forster had no experience in an action flick and it really showed.

[The Magic Rat]

Ok fair enough...I'll admit you are right about the movie being like Bourne...which I didn't care for...all that fast paced, quick camera switching is more annoying that it is thrilling to look at...the fight scene in the bell tower could have been so cool if they just SHOWED the fight and the stunts.

That's what gets me...how do you as a director look at the finished product and go..."yeah, that's great looking." YOU CAN'T TELL WHAT'S GOING ON!

All that time, all the training they put into doing those stunts to see barely any of it seems like such a waist. The scenes were too fast and too tight.

Perhaps on multiple viewings it will be better...I watched a youtube clip on the car chase from the beginning...it didn't seem as bad as it did in the theater...but again...it was over so quickly.

I think back to movies like Bullit or the Seven Ups...those were car chases...these new directors need to watch the old classics to get a sense of realism or at least a style of camera work when capturing action sequences.


I agree 100% with you! The action really was superb, it was just remarkably frustrating because you had no idea what was going on. I honestly can not believe that we are in the minority of people who would like clear action over frequent cuts of zoom in shots. I, too, watched a few clips on YouTube again and still feel the same way. Comparing the direction in CR to QoS...well, it's kinda sad.

And my God, the Bullitt chase is still one of my favorites. Nothing too fancy, just good driving and a tense chase.

[The Magic Rat]

Marc Forster had no experience in an action flick and it really showed.

This, too. I think if the direction had been good it would've really helped my enjoyment of the film.

[agentsands77]

This, too. I think if the direction had been good it would've really helped my enjoyment of the film.
In general, I thought Forster's direction was excellent. Action scenes aside, QUANTUM OF SOLACE was a beautiful, elegant film, with some terrific sweeping cinematography.

Now, granted the action sequences were sometimes confusing (for me, the boat chase is the big culprit here, where towards the end it is entirely indiscernible), but I didn't mind the editing as much as most. I thought the car chase was terrific, bone-crunching stuff, and the following rooftop chase/art gallery fight felt like classic Bond. it also had the wonderful touch of an innocent bystander being shot and killed - something I've wanted to see in a Bond film for a long time).

My favorite sequence, though, was the opera house shoot-out. It's less of an action sequence and more of an elegant montage, but it was pretty breathtaking. We've never had anything like that in a Bond film before.

[Mike00spy]

No, I think Daniel Craig is a great Bond. I enjoy it. I don't think he's exactly like the novelized Bond but I think he is closest and easily the second best behind Connery. I think the MOVIE is what is like Bourne. The direction/action is the most notable, but with the rooftop chase, the finale waiting in the dark-every time that stuff happened it just made me think of Bourne.

You mean when Bond waited in the dark for Professor Dent in Dr. No?

There was a rooftop chase cut from On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

And Bourne was hardly the first time a movie employed fast editing- see the previously mentioned OHMSS.

[Mike00spy]

In general, I thought Forster's direction was excellent. Action scenes aside, QUANTUM OF SOLACE was a beautiful, elegant film, with some terrific sweeping cinematography.

Now, granted the action sequences were sometimes confusing (for me, the boat chase is the big culprit here, where towards the end it is entirely indiscernible), but I didn't mind the editing as much as most. I thought the car chase was terrific, bone-crunching stuff, and the following rooftop chase/art gallery fight felt like classic Bond. it also had the wonderful touch of an innocent bystander being shot and killed - something I've wanted to see in a Bond film for a long time).

My favorite sequence, though, was the opera house shoot-out. It's less of an action sequence and more of an elegant montage, but it was pretty breathtaking. We've never had anything like that in a Bond film before.


I agree with much of your post. It is amazing I enjoyed this movie as much as I did- without being wowed by the action. Craig's Bond performace and journey was simply more engaging and important to the story than the action. For some, that is a problem. Not for me though.

[The Magic Rat]

You mean when Bond waited in the dark for Professor Dent in Dr. No?

There was a rooftop chase cut from On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

And Bourne was hardly the first time a movie employed fast editing- see the previously mentioned OHMSS.


It's not just waiting in the dark. It's waiting in the dark, in an apartment, at night, in Russia, in the winter. It's incredibly similar to the end of Supremacy. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but as I've stated before, Bond really didn't utilize fancy martial arts techniques all that much until Casino Royale.

Look, whatever I say about this movie you immediately disregard. I'm guessing this has to do with the fact your name is "Mike00spy". If you are seriously refusing any similarities whatsoever to the Bourne films, then you're in denial.

I'm not saying that they're ripping off from the Bourne films. It's just that the way these films have been made, especially QoS, bear an incredible similarity to the Bourne series in style, editing, and production values. I really don't think that's an irrational statement, especially considering that seems to be the consensus.

[agentsands77]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but as I've stated before, Bond really didn't utilize fancy martial arts techniques all that much until Casino Royale.
Unless you count Roger Moore's constant karate-chopping. :gun:

[The Magic Rat]

Unless you count Roger Moore's constant karate-chopping. :gun:


http://jamesbondisadick.ytmnd.com/

-This one always made me laugh

[Mike00spy]

Look, whatever I say about this movie you immediately disregard. I'm guessing this has to do with the fact your name is "Mike00spy". If you are seriously refusing any similarities whatsoever to the Bourne films, then you're in denial.

A sense of perspective is needed.. no need to get upset about it. A discussion board is no fun if you just have a series of "I agree" posts.

I do need to bring up an earlier statement, though:

That's one of the things that has bothered me the most about the "feel" of this franchise now. They have really changed who and what Bond is to compete with Bourne. Seriously, anyone who likes the new Bond has to admit that. During the hotel scene I was about ready for Bond to start beating the guy up with a book!

There is a difference with saying that there are some similiar styles and such to your statement there. I've heard it before and it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

The Bond series is cyclical. Right now we are in the most serious period of Bond films. Had this been 1979 we'd be in the middle of the campiest period of Bonds.

Now, why is Bond so serious all of a sudden? Is it b/c of Bourne? Of course not.

Bond was envisioned as a serious character; a blunt instrument. He may not have started out that way, but Dr. No hardly had Fleming displeased at the interpretation of his character. After From Russia With Love, you would notice a shift towards camp and over the top spectacle. It peaked with YOLT. After Connery left, they made a valiant try to rein Bond in with the underrated OHMSS.

But since it wasn't a runaway hit, they went in the other direction in the 70's ... and Moonraker took that type of Bond as far as it could go. But, once again they took a step back and tried a more down to earth film in For Your Eyes Only.

This type of "battle" between a more serious and comic Bond continued. The key thing to keep in mind that after going in the extreme (in either direction) the producers always went a different route next time.

2002 was Die Another Day and after going too far there, they took a step back like they always have done. Then, they finally had the rights to Casino Royale. Filming it obviously meant that Bond had to go back to his roots. They had the chance to define the character in the vein of Fleming. You couldn't have invisible cars anymore; Bond needed to be in the "real world" but with that sense of fantasy that Fleming always had. (Producer Michael G. Wilson had always wanted to go this route, but was prevented from doing so when Tim Dalton was hired).

This is why the series is what it is now.

It has nothing to do with Bourne. Think about it. They are hardly "competing" for anything. They are not released at the same time. The success of one doesn't infringe on the other. And the most important factor is the Bond just simply makes more money than Bourne.

2002 Die Another Day: 431 Million
2002 Bourne Identity: 231 Million
2005 Bourne Supremacy: 288 Million
2006 Casino Royale: 594 Million
2007: Bourne Ultimatum: 442 Million

Does Bond need to "copy" a movie series that makes less money than them? So, when you say that Bond is being changed to "compete" with Bourne I shake my head.

Now, can there be some similiar styles? Sure. It helps when some of the same people have worked on both films.

But, keep in mind when one says: "This is taken from Bourne" that in many cases, these examples can be traced back to a book or an earlier Bond film.

[The Magic Rat]

A sense of perspective is needed.. no need to get upset about it. A discussion board is no fun if you just have a series of "I agree" posts.

I do need to bring up an earlier statement, though:



There is a difference with saying that there are some similiar styles and such to your statement there. I've heard it before and it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

The Bond series is cyclical. Right now we are in the most serious period of Bond films. Had this been 1979 we'd be in the middle of the campiest period of Bonds.

Now, why is Bond so serious all of a sudden? Is it b/c of Bourne? Of course not.

Bond was envisioned as a serious character; a blunt instrument. He may not have started out that way, but Dr. No hardly had Fleming displeased at the interpretation of his character. After From Russia With Love, you would notice a shift towards camp and over the top spectacle. It peaked with YOLT. After Connery left, they made a valiant try to rein Bond in with the underrated OHMSS.

But since it wasn't a runaway hit, they went in the other direction in the 70's ... and Moonraker took that type of Bond as far as it could go. But, once again they took a step back and tried a more down to earth film in For Your Eyes Only.

This type of "battle" between a more serious and comic Bond continued. The key thing to keep in mind that after going in the extreme (in either direction) the producers always went a different route next time.

2002 was Die Another Day and after going too far there, they took a step back like they always have done. Then, they finally had the rights to Casino Royale. Filming it obviously meant that Bond had to go back to his roots. They had the chance to define the character in the vein of Fleming. You couldn't have invisible cars anymore; Bond needed to be in the "real world" but with that sense of fantasy that Fleming always had. (Producer Michael G. Wilson had always wanted to go this route, but was prevented from doing so when Tim Dalton was hired).

This is why the series is what it is now.

It has nothing to do with Bourne. Think about it. They are hardly "competing" for anything. They are not released at the same time. The success of one doesn't infringe on the other. And the most important factor is the Bond just simply makes more money than Bourne.

2002 Die Another Day: 431 Million
2002 Bourne Identity: 231 Million
2005 Bourne Supremacy: 288 Million
2006 Casino Royale: 594 Million
2007: Bourne Ultimatum: 442 Million

Does Bond need to "copy" a movie series that makes less money than them? So, when you say that Bond is being changed to "compete" with Bourne I shake my head.

Now, can there be some similiar styles? Sure. It helps when some of the same people have worked on both films.

But, keep in mind when one says: "This is taken from Bourne" that in many cases, these examples can be traced back to a book or an earlier Bond film.


See, you aren't listening. I'm completely for having a discussion, but you keep misstating what I'm saying for one thing. It's not that we're differing, it's that it feels like disregarding. I didn't say Bond is "copying" Bourne. I've made sure that I've said that several times now. All I've said is that the production of the movie bears incredible similarities to Bourne because Marc Forster and Paul Haggis are being directly influenced by the success and style of the Bourne movies.

Didn't you see what I said? I love Craig's Bond. I've said that like three times now. It's not about him. I'm fine with him being serious, there can be a serious tone. But the entire tone of the film, the character development, action, direction, even some of the scenes are remarkably similar if not damn near straight out of Bourne. The similarities are there and blatant.

Of course Bourne took things from Bond, but it was done differently to make it Bourne. That's why people liked them so much, it was familiar yet different. The issue with this one is that this Bond just basically feels like Bourne and has very little resemblance to the Bond people know.

I'm not trashing the movie, but if you keep disregarding the obvious comparisons (see above) and digress to the comparison of old Bond films it's not even worth discussing.

It's not like I'm the only one saying this. It's almost a consensus, even from people who enjoy the movie, except for some stranglers such as yourself who simply for whatever reason won't admit that it borrows from the Bourne series.

These people are more brutal than me and do somewhat lean towards the "copying" claim, but I use it for the point of showing that it's ridiculous to not see the similarities:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24670533-15803,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1858881,00.html?iid=tsmodule

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1599316/story.jhtml

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/sunday/main4607734.shtml

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081111/REVIEWS/811129989


I'm really not trying to come off as a jerk, I just can not understand how you don't see the very extreme and reoccurring Bourne elements in the movie. It's more than just "some similar styles". It's basically the whole style. But at least you're saying that now!

And I might add Die Another Day made 160 domestically. Casino Royale made 167. Bourne Identity (a starter upper) made 127, Bourne Supremacy, 176. Bourne Ultimatum, 227. Keep in mind that America is the single greatest box office deciding factor most of the time and meeting the American movie goers demand is a big focus. Sure, Bond has the established international name which helps it over seas quite a bit. But the Bourne style certainly sells quite well and I could argue that it does better. It's no surprise that they look to it for inspiration.

[caats]

i think the bourne comparison is viable in the way Forster directed. he didn't have experience in action, and i wouldn't be surprised if he looked at the Bourne's to figure action out. the editing just ended up like bourne. not a big deal though. who cares.

[Mike00spy]

See, you aren't listening. I'm completely for having a discussion, but you keep misstating what I'm saying for one thing. It's not that we're differing, it's that it feels like disregarding. I didn't say Bond is "copying" Bourne.

We're arguing different sides here. I take exception to this statement by you:

That's one of the things that has bothered me the most about the "feel" of this franchise now. They have really changed who and what Bond is to compete with Bourne.

This is not true and I've just explained why in my previous post.

[The Magic Rat]

We're arguing different sides here. I take exception to this statement by you:



This is not true and I've just explained why in my previous post.

No, you haven't for like the fourth time now. You compared it to the old Bonds, which is of little similarity regardless of the circular evolution of Bond, and keep disregarding the direct comparisons I (and countless others) have made to Bourne. Also, please try not to look at the time I used "compete" as a poor choice of verb but at what I've said the other 95% of the time. Compete was intended to come across as something looser (read provide a similar "but we can do it better" attitude) with the Bourne style.

I'm sick of saying the same thing several times, though, so I'm done with this post.

[Charlie Green]

I saw it on opening day :D

I thought it was amazing, Here is my complete list of them.
My New Top 24 Bond Films
1. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
2. Quantum Of Solace
3. The Spy Who Loved Me
4. Licence To Kill
5. The Living Daylights
6. From Russia With Love
7. Live And Let Die
8. Goldfinger
9. Casino Royale (2006)
10. Moonraker
11. Tomorrow Never Dies
12. Thunderball
13. Goldeneye
14. The World Is Not Enough
15. Dr. No
16. You Only Live Twice
17. A View To A Kill
18. Die Another Day
19. The Man With The Golden Gun
20. For Your Eyes Only
21. Octo*****
22. Diamonds Are Forever
23. Casino Royale (1967)
24. Never Say Never Again

[Deckard]

My Top 10

From Russia With Love
Goldfinger
The Living Daylights
Quantum of Solace
Casino Royale
Thunderball
The Spy Who Loved Me
GoldenEye
Dr. No
Live and Let Die

[Finn]

Allow me to join those who liked QoS. I didn't find it as enjoyable as Casino Royale, but a good, solid show nevertheless. The editing and the story pacing could have been better (yes, it was pretty "Bourne" sometimes). But it was still a very worthwhile and fulfilling viewing experience, almost solely because of Daniel Craig. His interpretation of 007 down right rocks. The earlier Bond films are more or less guilty pleasures, something I watch when I wish to take a trip down the memory lane to childhood, but these new ones are something I find I can honestly dig as a grownup too.

Here's for a three more, Mr. Craig. Let's see if you start to feel old somewhere around the fourth installment.


It's interesting also that this was the first Bond film directed by a person who doesn't hail from the Commonwealth (Marc Forster is Swiss). It opens a whole lot of interesting new views and direction styles as options for the upcoming films. Perhaps next we see a Bond film directed by a Frenchman? :p

[The Man]

Danny Boyle should be a lock for directing one of these - if, of course, he'd be interested. Also, Joe Wright would be an intriguing choice...

[Dr. Round]

Allow me to join those who liked QoS. I didn't find it as enjoyable as Casino Royale, but a good, solid show nevertheless. The editing and the story pacing could have been better (yes, it was pretty "Bourne" sometimes). But it was still a very worthwhile and fulfilling viewing experience, almost solely because of Daniel Craig. His interpretation of 007 down right rocks. The earlier Bond films are more or less guilty pleasures, something I watch when I wish to take a trip down the memory lane to childhood, but these new ones are something I find I can honestly dig as a grownup too.

Here's for a three more, Mr. Craig. Let's see if you start to feel old somewhere around the fourth installment.


It's interesting also that this was the first Bond film directed by a person who doesn't hail from the Commonwealth (Marc Forster is Swiss). It opens a whole lot of interesting new views and direction styles as options for the upcoming films. Perhaps next we see a Bond film directed by a Frenchman? :p

Or maybe an American, like say... Spielberg? ;)

[agentsands77]

Or maybe an American, like say... Spielberg? ;)
I'm skeptical that the Bond franchise will ever approach directors who are that big. They'd overshadow the production, in addition to demanding practically complete control.

[The Magic Rat]

I'm skeptical that the Bond franchise will ever approach directors who are that big. They'd overshadow the production, in addition to demanding practically complete control.

Well, let's all remember how Indy came to be...

[TheMutt92]

Just saw this Saturday night, and despite never having seen Casino Royal (or a full Bond film for that matter), I really enjoyed it! I'd give it about a 4.5/5. My only main grip was from the beginning to right after he kills the guy in the hotel room, it just all felt rushed and a bit confusing. But after that, smooth sailing the rest of the way.

Some of my favorite sequences:
Opening Titles (I don't care what people say, but that song was catchy!)
The Boat Sequence
The Opera Scene
The Airplane Sequence
The Finale

And I felt a number of the dialogue sequences were pretty strong as well.

[RaideroftheArk]

I agree 100% with you! The action really was superb, it was just remarkably frustrating because you had no idea what was going on. I honestly can not believe that we are in the minority of people who would like clear action over frequent cuts of zoom in shots. I, too, watched a few clips on YouTube again and still feel the same way. Comparing the direction in CR to QoS...well, it's kinda sad.

And my God, the Bullitt chase is still one of my favorites. Nothing too fancy, just good driving and a tense chase.

You know what's funny...the very first thing I learned in basic photography was...HOLD THE CAMERA STILL.

Comparing the direction between the two movies is sad...QOS seems so rushed.

[The Magic Rat]

You know what's funny...the very first thing I learned in basic photography was...HOLD THE CAMERA STILL.

Comparing the direction between the two movies is sad...QOS seems so rushed.


Very good choice of words, it does feel rushed. I like that explanation.

[Forbidden Eye]

Or maybe an American, like say... Spielberg? ;)

Considering how long it took Spielberg just to make Indy 4, I think it's safe to say a Bond film will never be on his 'To-Do' list.

I finally saw QOS yesterday, and I have to go with the side that didn't care for it. I didn't passionately dislike it, but I didn't passionately like it either, it just felt like another film I've happened to see in my life, not at all like something special that Casino Royale was.

The problem was it just didn't get you emotionally attached to the story-line and the tempo was just way too fast. I blame Marc Forster, who just didn't seem to understand Bond.

There were a couple good action sequences, but ultimately, didn't affect my lifr in anyway. Shame. I was hoping back in July that this would revolutionize James Bond and action films the same way The Dark Knight revolutionized Batman and superhero films. This is didn't even bring me the pure sense of excitement and fun that Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull did.

Craig is still great as Bond, but lets hope next time he has something memorable to do. And while I'm at it, that opening song = pure awfulness. :down:

[The Magic Rat]

Considering how long it took Spielberg just to make Indy 4, I think it's safe to say a Bond film will never be on his 'To-Do' list.

I finally saw QOS yesterday, and I have to go with the side that didn't care for it. I didn't passionately dislike it, but I didn't passionately like it either, it just felt like another film I've happened to see in my life, not at all like something special that Casino Royale was.

The problem was it just didn't get you emotionally attached to the story-line and the tempo was just way too fast. I blame Marc Forster, who just didn't seem to understand Bond.

There were a couple good action sequences, but ultimately, didn't affect my lifr in anyway. Shame. I was hoping back in July that this would revolutionize James Bond and action films the same way The Dark Knight revolutionized Batman and superhero films. This is didn't even bring me the pure sense of excitement and fun that Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull did.

Craig is still great as Bond, but lets hope next time he has something memorable to do. And while I'm at it, that opening song = pure awfulness. :down:

I agree 100%. Good summary, you put into words exactly how I felt.

In all fairness I do suppose Casino Royale revolutionized the Bond/action film genre in its own way. There never really was a Bond the way he was Bond.

[TheMutt92]

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

At today's press day for the new James Bond flick Quantum of Solace, director Marc Forster revealed that he'd originally intended the film to end with something of a cliffhanger -- as opposed to the current ending, which effectively serves as a bookend to the two-chapter storyline that began with 2006's Casino Royale.

"There was a scene after where the movie ends now," explained Forster. "The movie felt sort of complete with Bond finding his 'quantum of solace.' If I would have kept the scene, then producers wouldn't have had a choice but to make it a trilogy. Now they can start new. They have that opportunity."

Forster added that the excised scene, a little over a minute in length, is slated to appear on the Quantum of Solace DVD. And what vital information does it contain? "Let's put it this way: Bond encounters Mr. White at the end of that scene," he teased, hinting at the possibility that White may be the chief architect of the conspiracy at the heart of the film. "You wouldn't have had a choice at the end of that but to follow that lead."

Bond fans will remember Mr. White (Jesper Christensen) as the villain in Casino Royale who executes terrorist financier Le Chiffre before being captured by 007. In Quantum of Solace, the name of the shadowy, SPECTRE-like organization to which Mr. White belongs is revealed to be Quantum.

Is Mr. White the new Blofeld? Bond fans will have the opportunity to parse the deleted scene and decide for themselves when Quantum of Solace arrives on DVD in 2009.

Producer Barbara Broccoli has hinted that the next James Bond movie will complete a Daniel Craig trilogy.

Speaking to Coming Soon, Broccoli said that the 23rd Bond instalment is likely to finish the story started in Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace.

She said: "Hopefully at the end of Quantum Of Solace, we have this 'whole' character. And now we can do what we want.

"I think in some way, he will go after the [Quantum] organisation. So in that sense, it may become a trilogy, but we haven't really structured it that way."

Its one thing I'm liking about this new Bond series is how its more connected. How Bond's actions and the people he meets will have consequences and connections w/ what he does one or two films down the line.

[The Magic Rat]

Its one thing I'm liking about this new Bond series is how its more connected. How Bond's actions and the people he meets will have consequences and connections w/ what he does one or two films down the line.

The part that worries me is all this "trilogy" talk. If it's a trilogy, I would HATE for them to only use Daniel Craig for three movies or something silly like that. I'd like him to stick around longer.

[Finn]

The part that worries me is all this "trilogy" talk. If it's a trilogy, I would HATE for them to only use Daniel Craig for three movies or something silly like that. I'd like him to stick around longer. Craig has signed a contract to appear as 007 in at least three consequent Bond films after QoS.

It's a wholly different deal if the producers are slated to go with him that long, of course. But with the good show he's been putting up this far... it doesn't exactly need fixing yet.

[The Magic Rat]

Craig has signed a contract to appear as 007 in at least three consequent Bond films after QoS.

It's a wholly different deal if the producers are slated to go with him that long, of course. But with the good show he's been putting up this far... it doesn't exactly need fixing yet.

Ah, good. I had not heard that his contract was that long. That's fantastic, though. I certainly hope they keep making them at the pace they are now. We've had to put up with some large gaps in the past. I think one every two years is entirely reasonable.

[agentsands77]

Ah, good. I had not heard that his contract was that long. That's fantastic, though. I certainly hope they keep making them at the pace they are now. We've had to put up with some large gaps in the past. I think one every two years is entirely reasonable.
Well, BOND 23 is tentatively scheduled for 2011, so we'll have a longer gap between QUANTUM and BOND 23 than we did between CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM.

[The Magic Rat]

Well, BOND 23 is tentatively scheduled for 2011, so we'll have a longer gap between QUANTUM and BOND 23 than we did between CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM.

Really? I could swear I just read it was scheduled for 2010? Man, if that's the truth that's a real bummer. :down:

[TheMutt92]

Really? I could swear I just read it was scheduled for 2010? Man, if that's the truth that's a real bummer. :down:

Yeah. Guess the producers were a bit tired after going right from CR to QoS (w/ preproduction on Qos starting during post on CR). I've heard they'll interviewing writers this January. So I guess the team thats been writing the past four or five is being retired off.

[The Magic Rat]

Yeah. Guess the producers were a bit tired after going right from CR to QoS (w/ preproduction on Qos starting during post on CR). I've heard they'll interviewing writers this January. So I guess the team thats been writing the past four or five is being retired off.

Wow, that's a pretty big change up. I'll be very interested in seeing who they pick. Whoever it is will be getting to handle the development of the whole Quantum plot line, so that's a pretty big deal.

[agentsands77]

Really? I could swear I just read it was scheduled for 2010? Man, if that's the truth that's a real bummer. :down:
Theoretically, they could get it all together by 2010, but it's a bit of a reach. 2011 is a safe bet, given the kind of break that the producers have been talking about (they're exhausted after back-to-back flicks, and understandably so).

Wow, that's a pretty big change up.
It's about time we had a change. Purvis and Wade, who worked on THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, DIE ANOTHER DAY, CASINO ROYALE, and QUANTUM OF SOLACE (though most of their work was thrown away), were never truly good writers. The Bond franchise deserves better.

And while Paul Haggis was certainly a good asset to these new Bond flicks, he did have some rather crazy story ideas for QUANTUM OF SOLACE (which, thankfully, the producers and director ultimately rejected). And given that a bit of his bitterness over QUANTUM's production has seeped through in interviews, I'm not sure he's keen on returning.

[Forbidden Eye]

Really? I could swear I just read it was scheduled for 2010? Man, if that's the truth that's a real bummer. :down:

Why is that necessarily a bummer? Considering you seemed to agreed with me on my criticisms for the film, wouldn't a longer gap just allow a longer time period to make a better film?

[TheMutt92]

And while Paul Haggis was certainly a good asset to these new Bond flicks, he did have some rather crazy story ideas for QUANTUM OF SOLACE (which, thankfully, the producers and director ultimately rejected).

Such as...?

[agentsands77]

Such as...?
Haggis desperately wanted Vesper to have had a son in the background somewhere, that she'd had long before Bond. So Bond, then, would find out about the recently orphaned kid and go looking for him throughout QUANTUM OF SOLACE, only to hand him off to somebody else at the end of the film.

It's a pretty poor idea, and the producers rightly objected for a number of reasons. First off, it doesn't really make sense; why wouldn't we have heard about the kid in CASINO ROYALE? Second off, it makes Vesper look far worse than necessary (she'd leave behind her own kid to fend for himself?). There are also problems with Bond, an orphan himself, just abandoning Vesper's kid at the end of the flick.

[TheMutt92]

Haggis desperately wanted Vesper to have had a son in the background somewhere, that she'd had long before Bond. So Bond, then, would find out about the recently orphaned kid and go looking for him throughout QUANTUM OF SOLACE, only to hand him off to somebody else at the end of the film.

It's a pretty poor idea, and the producers rightly objected for a number of reasons. First off, it doesn't really make sense; why wouldn't we have heard about the kid in CASINO ROYALE? Second off, it makes Vesper look far worse than necessary (she'd leave behind her own kid to fend for himself?). There are also problems with Bond, an orphan himself, just abandoning Vesper's kid at the end of the flick.

Yeah, bad idea. :down:

[The Magic Rat]

Why is that necessarily a bummer? Considering you seemed to agreed with me on my criticisms for the film, wouldn't a longer gap just allow a longer time period to make a better film?

Not necessarily. There's no absolute correlation between more production time and higher quality. Though rushing production would be a bit of a difference, I suppose. Though if they actually listen to their critics, things could turn on a dime. I mean, it couldn't have taken more than six months or so to shoot Quantum of Solace, right?

Regardless, seeing a new Bond flick is always something to look forward to in my book (even if I have to have lower standards, which I most certainly did after Die Another Day).

Or I guess I'm impatient. That could be.

[The Magic Rat]

Haggis desperately wanted Vesper to have had a son in the background somewhere, that she'd had long before Bond. So Bond, then, would find out about the recently orphaned kid and go looking for him throughout QUANTUM OF SOLACE, only to hand him off to somebody else at the end of the film.

It's a pretty poor idea, and the producers rightly objected for a number of reasons. First off, it doesn't really make sense; why wouldn't we have heard about the kid in CASINO ROYALE? Second off, it makes Vesper look far worse than necessary (she'd leave behind her own kid to fend for himself?). There are also problems with Bond, an orphan himself, just abandoning Vesper's kid at the end of the flick.

Thank God they rejected it. Seriously, Haggis is a melodramatic hack. I do not care for his work.

[Finn]

Thank God they rejected it. Seriously, Haggis is a melodramatic hack. I do not care for his work. I call this the 'Darabont Syndrome'. I mean, make one film that is considered "bigger than life" and suddenly a writer thinks everything he touches is (or should be) of the same caliber.

[agentsands77]

Comic book artist Francesco Francavilla has put together a retro-style poster for QUANTUM OF SOLACE:

http://www.francescofrancavilla.com/gallery/images/007_QOS_craig_low.jpg

[The Man]

Comic book artist Francesco Francavilla has put together a retro-style poster for QUANTUM OF SOLACE:

http://www.francescofrancavilla.com/gallery/images/007_QOS_craig_low.jpg

Looks like Steve McQueen with a pinch of Richard Burton. Retro rocks...:cool:

[Goonie]

Comic book artist Francesco Francavilla has put together a retro-style poster for QUANTUM OF SOLACE:

http://www.francescofrancavilla.com/gallery/images/007_QOS_craig_low.jpg

That's cool! Is there one like that for Casino Royale?

[The Magic Rat]

Looks like Steve McQueen with a pinch of Richard Burton. Retro rocks...:cool:


Haha! I, too, thought he looked incredibly like Steve McQueen there.

[indyflys_solo]

As an action scene, maybe. But it featured at least one wonderful character moment: Bond holding a shocked Camille, preparing to put her out of her misery in an interesting echo of the shower scene from CASINO ROYALE.


Bond grew and changed as a character in reacting to Vesper's death. At the end of QUANTUM OF SOLACE, he's been able to convert his grief over Vesper's death into a positive good. I think that's the best-handled thing about QUANTUM OF SOLACE.


I don't think we needed to know to get a sense of what the moment meant to Bond's character. The important thing wasn't his conversation with Yusef (whatever it entailed). The important thing was what preceded it, when Bond saved the Canadian gal from the same fate as Vesper.

Ditto. I caught the Shower Scene thing too... defintely an acceptable follow-up for Casino Royale. QoS is more of a transitional film, and a lot of people aren't getting that. He loved Vesper, and she's dead-- for him and because of him. QoS lets him realize this and move on, while at the same time making sure such choices as to avoid his tragedy for others (like Corrine, the Canadian). I was glad he didn't kill Yusef, and that they didn't show us what was said: it makes it less of a revenge than a call of duty, and proves Bond's inner honor. If CR was 4.5/5, QoS was a decent 3.5/5. Go see it. :up:

[The Man]

Danny Boyle should be a lock for directing one of these - if, of course, he'd be interested.

And he could (http://www.cinemablend.com/new.php?id=12207) be a lock...

Their sources tell them that Bond producer Barbara Broccoli is pursuing Boyle’s services. In fact they say he’s been offered the job.

Hmmm...

[Goonie]

^Bond vs. Zombies in London? Right on!;)

[agentsands77]

Danny Boyle's not doing BOND 23. (http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0696687/)

[TheMutt92]

Just bought this on DVD Saturday and rewatched it. And it while its not quite as good as the first time I saw it (in the time since, I have bought and seen Casino Royale), its still a well executed film. The only major scene I didn't quite care for as much was the dogfight. In fact, I actually like the first fifteen minutes now which I originally had a problem with. Go figure... :rolleyes:

And as for my Bond 23 director? Maybe not for this one, but Christopher Nolan should defintly be at least consider (as long as this dosn't interfere w/ Batman 3, I'm good!)

I'd love to see an eventual re-edit with Quantum attached directly to the end of Royale...

Fan edit anyone...? :D