Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace :D

[lDlisturb3d]

I had to throw a curve ball so here it is. Its gonna be a tough on though.

[Anti-SD]

Casino Royale for me.

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by Anti-SD

Casino Royale for me.

ok vote on the poll above you.

[SleeperAgent]

Both are superb films. The best of the bond franchise.

Leave it at that.

[Chaotic]

Casino Royale without a doubt

[headphoneboy]

Originally Posted by SleeperAgent

Both are superb films. The best of the bond franchise.

Leave it at that.

Quantum is only half as good as Casino Royale. which still makes it a decent movie, but not a great one. Casino Royale is a truly great Bond film (or just a truly great action film in general).

[lDlisturb3d]

I just like solace allot because he goes all out. I looks like he's on drugs during the whole movie. Dirty BOND!!!! gets my vote.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by deeman54

I had to throw a curve ball so here it is. Its gonna be a tough on though.

Are we talking in terms of the transfer or the movie, imho the better movie is Casino Royale, but Quantum has a better transfer.

[,deeii]

I liked Quantum better.

[LordCrumb]

Casino Royale. Easy pick, even though I enjoyed Quantum.

[HHX]

Casino Royal is always more fun for me to watch even though i love both movies. casino R has a better villain i think and the poker scenes are too cool!

[vegeta88]

Casino Royale by a long shot. Everything is superbly done in it. The characters are more interesting and more well rounded. The directing/editing is also great but more so the editing was annoying in QoS. I liked QoS. It was a good follow up to Casino Royale, a true sequel.

[Al_The_Strange]

I prefer "Casino Royale" above all other Bond films. It's epic!

"QoS" is pretty good, but I found its story a little hard to get, and the cameramanship makes me go .

[RiseDarthVader]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

"QoS" is pretty good, but I found its story a little hard to get, and the cameramanship makes me go .

Actually the camera is very steady and still if you look closely. The camera rarely shakes. It's the editing that makes you have no idea what's going on.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

Actually the camera is very steady and still if you look closely. The camera rarely shakes. It's the editing that makes you have no idea what's going on.

Actually, that is true. I do remember now that most scenes in between the action looked very solid. When we got to the action, the quick cuts made it feel too hectic.

I also think that the shots of the opening car chase could have focused on the cars a little better, but it's alright as it is.

[Jezza]

Although Casino Royale is certainley the better film, if you were to watch them back-to-back, as I did once, QoS is actually pretty good and makes much more sense. Tbh I think QoS did very well for continuing the plot very directly as such a thing is very difficult to pull off. The editing is a bit rushy shall we say, but it's still a good movie.

[recS-12]

Haven't seen Q.O.S. yet looking forward to it.

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by Clone Trooper

Although Casino Royale is certainley the better film, if you were to watch them back-to-back, as I did once, QoS is actually pretty good and makes much more sense. Tbh I think QoS did very well for continuing the plot very directly as such a thing is very difficult to pull off. The editing is a bit rushy shall we say, but it's still a good movie.

+1

Casino Royale is film-making on another level in my opinion, and that's simply for all the layers that are in there. QOS on the other hand makes absolutely no assertion that it's anything other than action and revenge for the most part. If either were taken on their own I think most would pick CR for it having a little more depth. Having said that, both the films are representative of where Bond's at in his journey. CR has him a little more innocent (in some ways), a lot more relaxed and much more of a smart @ss. QOS is Bond pissed off. Both reflect the character in the pace of the film and it's editing.

QOS feels a little underdeveloped when viewing by itself, however I've had a similar discussion with friends before and my view has been to consider and watch them as one four hour film rather than one 2.5 hour and one 1.5 hour film.

Just my opinion though...

[alposnacks]

To be honest, as a whole I think CR is better.

BUT, QoS is terribly underrated by both casual and hardcore Bond viewers alike. It has an artistic mode of direction that I like better than CR's more cut and dry direction, though everything in CR was marvelously executed.
QoS takes more risks and I like it a lot more in some respects than CR. It feels like a hidden gem whereas CR is a movie everyone will like.

[Daredevil666]

Come on, how can anyone like QOS, it's a huge pile of a shoddy, unfinished movie. It's like the third act is missing, as well as most sense from the story. After CR, it was the greatest disappointment ever. For me, they have nearly sunk the franchise after having revived it big time. I'm not sure about a director who let a beautiful woman like Olga Kurylenko play with that thing hanging around her neck (whatever it is supposed to be). Also it felt like Judi Dench, not Olga, was the true Bond girl.
Erm