oh bondage up yours.

by barnaby morbius Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:41 am

anyone else seen "quantum of solace" yet?

i thought it was alright but i have to go along with the consensus that it felt very much like the middle part of a story rather than a film in it's own right. it was a little too po faced for me as well- i'd have liked to see the villain living in an empty volcano or something.

daniel craig was fantastic again i thought- he could well be the best bond we've had.

so a disappointment after "casino royale" but by no means a disaster

by **Colin Hicks** Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:44 am

I thought it was, if not 10/10 Awesome, then a pretty damn god film, but I had made the point of rewatching Casino Royale pretty much straight away beforehand. as for "middle of a trilogy", not sure, but it certainly felt like the second half of the previous film.

by **The Co=Ordinator** Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:48 am

Bugger, I thought this was an X-Ray Spex tribute thread. Surprised

by Aspadistra Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:08 pm

Still to see this. Have a feeling I might actually manage to persuade husband to go along.

Oh. *is distracted* Pretty smilies. Eh? A smiling tomato? Eh...Why would someone need an elephant? Summat to do with never forgetting?

by **The Co=Ordinator** Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:10 pm

*waves furiously at Aspadistra*

Delighted you found us so quickly. I reckon you should persuade hubby to take you to Aladdin. Very Happy

by Sid Seadevil Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:28 pm

Doc Filth wrote:I thought it was, if not 10/10 Awesome, then a pretty damn god film, but I had made the point of rewatching Casino Royale pretty much straight away beforehand. as for "middle of a trilogy", not sure, but it certainly felt like the second half of the previous film.

I'd agree with this. Kate and I went to see it last Friday and totally enjoyed it. It certainly felt like the second half of CR - an impression that was underlined by QOS taking up the story just hours after the end of the events in the previous film, but it was really non the worse for that. Although I do suspect that for some people at least it's going to suffer due to that decision. If it had followed just about any latter Bond except Casino Royal, then I suspect many of the complaints levelled at it wouldn't have been voiced quite so vocally,

For us, it delivered. And at the end of the day that's all we personally could have asked for.

by Frank Wed Nov 05, 2008 6:31 pm

I'm sorry. But I thought it was an utter fucking disaster. That was not a Bond film at all. It felt like it was directed by a myopic pensioner. It was dull, ugly and without one ounce of charm. Even Daniel Craig and his magnificent tits couldn't save that travesty. The cinematographer should go back to being a wedding photographer because he drained all the glamour out of a film that was screaming for some. He made Craig look like he was 60 and poor Judi Dench look like a 102. The locations looked like shitholes and the villain was a bug eyed, mumbling Frenchman. And the plot was coughed up on a street corner somewhere and wiped down the front of Michael G. Wilson's suit.

It was shit. Crying or Very sad

by camino real Thu Nov 06, 2008 2:26 am

Don't hold back Frank! I've not been to see QoS yet but as I've never seen a Bond film at the pictures this is not surprising. I am indifferent to the JB franchise but did enjoy Casino Royale on DVD. It's a shame the sequel seems to be lacking somewhat.

by Frank Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:07 am

Er...yes. Apologies for that rant. But I have to agree with Mark Kermode. It was a mess. I'd wait for the DVD, Stephen.

I was so very disappointed in that film. Crying or Very sad

camino real wrote:Don't hold back Frank! I've not been to see QoS yet but as I've never seen a Bond film at the pictures this is not surprising. I am indifferent to the JB franchise but did enjoy Casino Royale on DVD. It's a shame the sequel seems to be lacking somewhat.

by barnaby morbius Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:59 am

Frank wrote:I'm sorry. But I thought it was an utter fucking disaster. That was not a Bond film at all. It felt like it was directed by a myopic pensioner. It was dull, ugly and without one ounce of charm. Even Daniel Craig and his magnificent tits couldn't save that travesty. The cinematographer should go back to being a wedding photographer because he drained all the glamour out of a film that was screaming for some. He made Craig look like he was 60 and poor Judi Dench look like a 102. The locations looked like shitholes and the villain was a bug eyed, mumbling Frenchman. And the plot was coughed up on a street corner somewhere and wiped down the front of Michael G. Wilson's suit.

It was shit.

other than that how did you enjoy the rest of the play mrs lincoln?

bit harsh...but some fair points.

by Frank Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:01 am

barnaby salton wrote:
Frank wrote:I'm sorry. But I thought it was an utter fucking disaster. That was not a Bond film at all. It felt like it was directed by a myopic pensioner. It was dull, ugly and without one ounce of charm. Even Daniel Craig and his magnificent tits couldn't save that travesty. The cinematographer should go back to being a wedding photographer because he drained all the glamour out of a film that was screaming for some. He made Craig look like he was 60 and poor Judi Dench look like a 102. The locations looked like shitholes and the villain was a bug eyed, mumbling Frenchman. And the plot was coughed up on a street corner somewhere and wiped down the front of Michael G. Wilson's suit.

It was shit.

other than that how did you enjoy the rest of the play mrs lincoln?

bit harsh...but some fair points.

It was harsh and I was angry. The major problem with the film, for me, is that there's this idea that all the major characters are morally grey - they're all amoral, anti-heroic (even M) - and I just don't think you can force Bond into being an anti-hero for very long. Forster blabbed on about how both good and evil are within Bond, the villains etc. The film hammers home that you can't tell who are the enemies and who are the friends anymore - Mathis specifically says that - and I don't have any problem with that idea. It suits the times we live in and Bond has always reflected the political and social zeitgeist in which he operates.

The difficulty you have then in trying to make Bond as laissez faire as the villains and vice versa is that we can no longer root for him or actually care about what the villain does. Bond ceases to be glamorous. He's just a.n.other gritty Jason Bourne wannabe. Forster in cahoots with Broccoli, Wilson and the writers have, I think, stripped away much of Bondian tropes that James Chapman argues you need. Do that and he ceases to be James Bond.

This stripping down then spirals out into the rest of the film. A title sequence that, suggestive of the moral blurring of the films characters, is all sand and silhouettes. It's so clear they've elbowed out the genius Danny Kleinman stuff and just gone for a rather dull reinforcement of their stripping down process. It's there in the cinemaphotography (all the actors look like they've had years piled onto them), and in the editing. There is a meanness of spirit about the film. The action sequences are squandered in an editing style that doesn't belong to this kind of film. Action in Bond should be widescreen, eye popping stuff. This has car chases suggested by abstracted blipverts of images. Compare the opening of Casino Royale to the opening of this and you'll see a massive difference and notice how reductionist QOS is.

It's really quite appalling what they've done in the name 'rebooting the franchise'. I left that film really quite upset last night.

by camino real Thu Nov 06, 2008 6:16 am

"Abstract blipverts of images", I like it! This tendency to make action sequences incomprehensible is one of my (many) bugbears with modern cinema. I do get a wee bit annoyed that, for many filmmakers, action is more exciting when you don't know what's going on. It's spread to the horror genre as well with films like '28 hours/days later' and the 'Saw' films. It was even present on 'Dead Set' which marred my enjoyment somewhat. And don't get me started on colour desaturation...

by delgadofan Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:05 pm

The vibe I'm getting generally is "loads of action but no fun".

I shall judge for myself in due course but I thought Casino Royale was the best Bond flick since ermmmmm....Casino Royale (1967)...nah, just kiddin', Goldfinger actually

by delgadofan Thu Nov 06, 2008 2:11 pm

Frank wrote:

It was shit.

Hey, Frank, can I borrow that quote and use it for The Incredible Hulk (2008)...and to think folks used to kick Ang Lee's original in the nuts.

by 72lf Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:29 pm

delgadofan wrote:
Frank wrote:

It was shit.

Hey, Frank, can I borrow that quote and use it for The Incredible Hulk (2008)...and to think folks used to kick Ang Lee's original in the nuts.

Well , after being a life long Bond fan and I proudly assert myself as a Dalton fan and OHMSS as my fav Bond of all time, I absolutly loved it.
I will explain why in a moment.
Firstly , The Brosnan movies were undoubtedly very successful and raked in the cash, but Goldeneye apart and some bits of Tomorrow, they were awful. They cast someone who can be a good actor in certain roles, Thomas Crown, Matador, Tailor of Panama etc, yet with Bond, he was just a walking wooden cliche. Now I dont dislike Brosnan by any means. I just think that audiences dictacted what they wanted to see and in fairness the Broccollis gave us what we thought we wanted for the time.
I find it very difficult to sit through a Brosnan Bond these days. World was simply boring and Die was just the nadir of what was going wrong with the franchise.
Everything that Austin Powers made fun of was in that movie. Cliched to the last.
They had to restart or they were in fear of destroying it.
When they announced that they had regained the rights to Casino I was pleased and Brosnan was delighted and I would have liked to see him have a swan song in that film.
But I could see where the Brocollis were coming from.......If Casino was huge with Brosnan , then where could they go?
Nope they needed to reboot the franchise.
So Casino I did enjoy...I loved the care taken with it, I liked the Cornell theme, I loved the Arnold score. For the first time ever Arnold gave us a really decent score rather than the greatest hits variations of the Bond theme. Each character had a motif and it was beautiful.....so when the Bond theme played at the end it got the house screaming.
The films itself is slightly over rated I think. Ther eare very flat points that drag.The film itself seems to be a 5 act film.....it doesnt know when to end. The defib scene is simply terrible and there are compromises to keeping some regognisable elements .
To me , it didnt go far enough.
And so to Quantum.
Well the Kinda guys in Cardiff told me that they mostly didnt care for it. some reviews were somewhat unkind , but I viewed with an open mind.
I loved it. and I loved it for the very reasons that most didnt .
They totally strip away all of the cliches. at last. No gadgets, the humour is dry, black and blink and youll miss it.#
Craig is almost a terminator like character. Ruthless, efficient almost supressing that human element....for now. No time fo rweakness, for cloudy judgement etc.
The whole film is pared down and very fast paced. and doesnt dwell on anything too long. More of this in my critique of what could have been better.
it was a Bond I waned to see....and I saw it twice over two days...second time was better.
They no longer are remaking the same movie and the running joke that Wade and Purvis simply tip exx the generic script title and scrawl another no longer applies.
The Theme by Arnold is surpressed as is the whole score. Im assuming this is intentional to give the action more impact.
Its a somewhat generic score by Arnold but Im listening to it in the car and its a grower...a slow grower mind.
The Jack and Alicia theme is brave but thematic..I liked it........no need to go for the Bassey overtones ....
The editing was a little over cut in spots, very Tony Scott and a bit ADD....the car chase was amazing but some of the fight sequences were over done and needed a extra sec here and there in spots for more impact.
Some sequences were a little cgi`d, but its a minimal and very much only used if it cant be done for real.
I dont think that the DVD with more footage will make people who didnt care for this like it any more..... Its very well paced and as ruthless in its efficiency as Bond is in this movie. Extra footage and longer character scenes would ruin the pacing.

In short Id give it a 3 and a half star for the movie but with 5 star action sequences.
Casino by comparison gets a solid 3.
Forster did an admirable job , hes has stated that he physicallky cannot direct another and that is fair enough, Im sure they are tough to make. I can see them get Campbell back.

by Frank Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:00 pm

72lf wrote:
Well , after being a life long Bond fan and I proudly assert myself as a Dalton fan and OHMSS as my fav Bond of all time, I absolutly loved it.
They totally strip away all of the cliches. at last. No gadgets, the humour is dry, black and blink and youll miss it.#
Craig is almost a terminator like character. Ruthless, efficient almost supressing that human element....for now. No time fo rweakness, for cloudy judgement etc.
The whole film is pared down and very fast paced. and doesnt dwell on anything too long. More of this in my critique of what could have been better.
it was a Bond I waned to see....and I saw it twice over two days...second time was better.
They no longer are remaking the same movie and the running joke that Wade and Purvis simply tip exx the generic script title and scrawl another no longer applies.
The Theme by Arnold is surpressed as is the whole score. Im assuming this is intentional to give the action more impact.
Its a somewhat generic score by Arnold but Im listening to it in the car and its a grower...a slow grower mind.
The Jack and Alicia theme is brave but thematic..I liked it........no need to go for the Bassey overtones ....
The editing was a little over cut in spots, very Tony Scott and a bit ADD....the car chase was amazing but some of the fight sequences were over done and needed a extra sec here and there in spots for more impact.
Some sequences were a little cgi`d, but its a minimal and very much only used if it cant be done for real.
I dont think that the DVD with more footage will make people who didnt care for this like it any more..... Its very well paced and as ruthless in its efficiency as Bond is in this movie. Extra footage and longer character scenes would ruin the pacing.

In short Id give it a 3 and a half star for the movie but with 5 star action sequences.
Casino by comparison gets a solid 3.
Forster did an admirable job , hes has stated that he physicallky cannot direct another and that is fair enough, Im sure they are tough to make. I can see them get Campbell back.

I absolutely get all of that. It's very clear that they wanted to push it as far away from everyone's preconceptions of a Bond film as possible. I just found it lifeless, personally and pushed so far to the extreme that it wasn't a patch on Casino Royale which did a great deal to reshape the franchise but to keep the Bondian elements intact. Much as I love Dan Craig, I didn't like the Bond he played in the film. It's like that old cliche - women want to have hm and men want to be him. Well, I think a lot of people will be looking for that and will be left wanting. I know I was. Ah, well. If they do get Campbell back, and I hope they do because he is a much better director for Bond than Forster, then we'll at least get the glamour back. And with the seismic shift brought on by Obama's election perhaps a bit of the old optimism too.

by **Patrick** Thu Nov 06, 2008 6:46 pm

Slight deviation from the subject matter. Very Happy

Quantum of Solace doesn't premiere on this side of Atlantic for another week, so I can't offer a review yet. I have, however, taken into consideration Frank's comments. Hmm. Must compartmentalise when I see it.

So, on the subject of Bond movies, I'd like to talk opening credits. Theme music in the opening credits, and the actual design of the opening credits. On both fronts, what are your three favorite Bond movies to date?

Again, as I can't see QoS for another week, I can't include it in my ratings. So here are mine:

Theme Songs during Opening Credits:
1. Live and Let Die (Paul McCartney)
2. A View to a Kill (Duran Duran)
3. The Living Daylights (A-Ha)

Opening Credit Sequence Design:
1. Goldeneye
2. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
3. Die Another Day

So what say you, fellow Wrinklies?

by barnaby morbius Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:07 am

Patrick wrote:Slight deviation from the subject matter.

Quantum of Solace doesn't premiere on this side of Atlantic for another week, so I can't offer a review yet. I have, however, taken into consideration Frank's comments. Hmm. Must compartmentalise when I see it.

So, on the subject of Bond movies, I'd like to talk opening credits. Theme music in the opening credits, and the actual design of the opening credits. On both fronts, what are your three favorite Bond movies to date?

Again, as I can't see QoS for another week, I can't include it in my ratings. So here are mine:

Theme Songs during Opening Credits:
1. Live and Let Die (Paul McCartney)
2. A View to a Kill (Duran Duran)
3. The Living Daylights (A View To A Kill)

Opening Credit Sequence Design:
1. Goldeneye
2. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
3. Die Another Day

So what say you, fellow Wrinklies?

musically

nobody does it better
diamonds are forever
live and let die

special mentions to "you know my name" and "thunderball" ,. kick in the pants for "the man with golden gun" and "die another day"

credits....er...

i seem to remember "the world is not enough" was quite good.

by **Patrick** Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:17 am

barnaby salton wrote:musically

nobody does it better
diamonds are forever
live and let die

special mentions to "you know my name" and "thunderball" ,. kick in the pants for "the man with golden gun" and "die another day"

credits....er...

i seem to remember "the world is not enough" was quite good.

You know, I completely overlooked "You Know My Name." I shall replace my number three selection with that.

by Affirmation Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:08 am

"Quantum of Solace" is one of the more outlandish, escapist and fantastical outings for James Bond; it has a distinctive look and feel to it which pushes it out of reality and into fantasyland, courtesy of a director who allows his art team to really go to town, and instructs his cinematographer to make everything beautiful -- particularly his leading man. This is a shrewd move, because the Paul Haggis dialogue is pared-down, minimalistic and clever, and the storytelling is oblique and demanding. And everything moves at the speed of violence. Violence is (nearly) always fast. A typical fight lasts two seconds. Bond races through this movie, pausing only to punch someone's lights out, or blow up a hotel, or stab someone to death, and the great thing--no, the BRILLIANT thing--is that he's always right; his moral compass, splattered with blood, points true north. Whilst everyone around him is in the dark, or untrustworthy, or in the game for personal reasons, Bond just follows a train of evidence to get to the Bad Guys, leaving a pile of corpses behind him, and doing it all with considerable elan. And in the process, he finds a bit of peace, matures as a secret agent, and *earns* the gunbarrel icon and the signature tune.

Magnificent, viscious, compelling, and the perfect Act 2 for the perfect James Bond.

by Frank Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:28 am

Affirmation wrote:"Quantum of Solace" is one of the more outlandish, escapist and fantastical outings for James Bond; it has a distinctive look and feel to it which pushes it out of reality and into fantasyland, courtesy of a director who allows his art team to really go to town, and instructs his cinematographer to make everything beautiful -- particularly his leading man. This is a shrewd move, because the Paul Haggis dialogue is pared-down, minimalistic and clever, and the storytelling is oblique and demanding. And everything moves at the speed of violence. Violence is (nearly) always fast. A typical fight lasts two seconds. Bond races through this movie, pausing only to punch someone's lights out, or blow up a hotel, or stab someone to death, and the great thing--no, the BRILLIANT thing--is that he's always right; his moral compass, splattered with blood, points true north. Whilst everyone around him is in the dark, or untrustworthy, or in the game for personal reasons, Bond just follows a train of evidence to get to the Bad Guys, leaving a pile of corpses behind him, and doing it all with considerable elan. And in the process, he finds a bit of peace, matures as a secret agent, and *earns* the gunbarrel icon and the signature tune.

Magnificent, viscious, compelling, and the perfect Act 2 for the perfect James Bond.

Can I see the version of Quantum Of Solace that you saw, please? It sounds a hell of a lot better than the dull, muddled Jason Bourne wannabe that I had the misfortune to pay to see.

by **Patrick** Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:06 pm

I have seen Quantum of Solace. And I found it excellent. Now, I have a theory, and if I can figure out how to do a spoiler wrap, I'll even share it.

Spoiler:

by Sid Seadevil Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:01 pm

Patrick wrote:I have seen Quantum of Solace. And I found it excellent. Now, I have a theory, and if I can figure out how to do a spoiler wrap, I'll even share it.

Spoiler:

It takes us to a position where Quantum can be deployed at any time they think it'll be most effective. It's pretty certain we haven't seen the last of them....

Spoiler:

by **Patrick** Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:05 pm

Sid Seadevil wrote:It takes us to a position where Quantum can be deployed at any time they think it'll be most effective. It's pretty certain we haven't seen the last of them....

Spoiler:

I like the cut of your jib, Mr. Seadevil. Smile

Spoiler:

by **Nick Barlow** Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:50 pm

Patrick wrote:
Sid Seadevil wrote:It takes us to a position where Quantum can be deployed at any time they think it'll be most effective. It's pretty certain we haven't seen the last of them....

Spoiler:

I like the cut of your jib, Mr. Seadevil.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

by Sponsored content

oh bondage up yours.

oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.

Re: oh bondage up yours.