Quantum of Solace

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by killowertz

That is highly recommended. You will probably appreciate QoS more if you watch it right after Casino Royale. I know it's been said a lot, but I said it again.

I don't know if there's been a response to this mentality, but doesn't that alone make the movie weak? You don't need to watch Empire immediately after seeing Star Wars to appreciate it. It's a great movie on its own. Or how about Aliens? Terminator 2? The Bourne Supremacy? The Dark Knight?

I mean, sure, it helps to see the first part to understand characters and motivation, but you don't have to watch them back-to-back to appreciate them.

[PS3+HDDVD OWNER]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

I don't know if there's been a response to this mentality, but doesn't that alone make the movie weak? You don't need to watch Empire immediately after seeing Star Wars to appreciate it. It's a great movie on its own. Or how about Aliens? Terminator 2? The Bourne Supremacy?

I mean, sure, it helps to see the first part to understand characters and motivation, but you don't have to watch them back-to-back to appreciate them.

+1, Good post


Quantom was a disappointment for me, big time.

[zahinn]

Yup..Quantum isn't really a good stand alone film. You will be very lost if you dont watch it in 10 days after watching Casino Royale. I still dont see where they spent 230 million dollars on in that movie.

[AppleCrumbDlite]

watched QoS last night.... idk, felt like something was missing. I think CR is much better

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

I don't know if there's been a response to this mentality, but doesn't that alone make the movie weak? You don't need to watch Empire immediately after seeing Star Wars to appreciate it. It's a great movie on its own. Or how about Aliens? Terminator 2? The Bourne Supremacy? The Dark Knight?

I mean, sure, it helps to see the first part to understand characters and motivation, but you don't have to watch them back-to-back to appreciate them.

You make a great case, but I don't share the same opinion. This is a unique circumstance that doesn't apply to all of those movies listed. This is a direct continuation of Casino Royale. None of those movies listed pick up mere minutes after the previous movie. The combination of Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace is basically one long story that lasts around four hours. If you have the opportunity to watch Casino Royale around the same time you watch QoS, I say take it. That in no way makes QoS a bad movie. I also never said it was required. I think doing that with any movie in a series is a plus.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by killowertz

You make a great case, but I don't share the same opinion. This is a unique circumstance that doesn't apply to all of those movies listed. This is a direct continuation of Casino Royale. None of those movies listed pick up mere minutes after the previous movie. The combination of Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace is basically one long story that lasts around four hours. If you have the opportunity to watch Casino Royale around the same time you watch QoS, I say take it. That in no way makes QoS a bad movie. I also never said it was required. I think doing that with any movie in a series is a plus.

How about The Two Towers?

In any case, even though I was disappointed with QoS in the theaters, I'm intrigued enough that I put it in my rental queue. As soon as it comes in, I'm going to watch both Casino Royale and QoS back to back to see if that makes a difference for me.

[jsteinhauer]

We watched 'em back to back. I think it's important. You can't be acutely tuned in to Bond's emotional state, if you haven't seen the CR recently.

That said, the David Craig Bond is a disappointment (as Bond). I prefer the Sean Connery Bond. Completely unemotional, they way you would expect a high level spy to be. Unattached from the women he targets and people he kills, and with a wry sense of humor. No baggage.

Craig's Bond parallels Jason Bourne too much. He has an agenda. It interferes with his work. The torment is in line with modern Superhero movies, a'la Iron Man, Spiderman, Incredible Hulk, Batman. It's just not James Bond to me.

Aside from that, both movies were immensely entertaining and fun. They just did not provide a James Bond fix, which is why I've bought all of the Bonds on BD, so's I can watch them when the wife goes out of town.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

I don't know if there's been a response to this mentality, but doesn't that alone make the movie weak? You don't need to watch Empire immediately after seeing Star Wars to appreciate it. It's a great movie on its own. Or how about Aliens? Terminator 2? The Bourne Supremacy? The Dark Knight?

I mean, sure, it helps to see the first part to understand characters and motivation, but you don't have to watch them back-to-back to appreciate them.

I don't think you need to. I think the reason this has had so many people like it more is that QOS relies heavily on you're understanding of the characters in Casino Royale (eg: who Mr. White is, Vesper's relationship), but it aslo requires you to remember how Bond felt (look at vespers death and the scene after). Many seemed to forget the conflict and rage Bond had in those moments and thus don't fully understand what trully is driving Bond.

Anyway, I don't think its a weakness of the film, rather it's having people remember the set-up that is the issue (and i'd prefer it how it is, rather then 20 minutes of exposition to set it al up in QOS).

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

We watched 'em back to back. I think it's important. You can't be acutely tuned in to Bond's emotional state, if you haven't seen the CR recently.

That said, the David Craig Bond is a disappointment (as Bond). I prefer the Sean Connery Bond. Completely unemotional, they way you would expect a high level spy to be. Unattached from the women he targets and people he kills, and with a wry sense of humor. No baggage.

Craig's Bond parallels Jason Bourne too much. He has an agenda. It interferes with his work. The torment is in line with modern Superhero movies, a'la Iron Man, Spiderman, Incredible Hulk, Batman. It's just not James Bond to me.

I'm glad you enjoyed it. Though I will add that Daniel Craig's Bond is the only Bond i've really cared about (or had an emotional attachement to) whilst watching a Bond film. It's also the most accurate to the character from the books that we will probably ever see. I disagree, I think this Bond is more vicous and willing to forgo his own emotions for MI6 and his country (ie: when the man in CR yells "i'll kill her" reffering to vesper and holding a knife to her though, he actually makes it clear that at that moment he was about to, hence "allow me" and was only stopped as he was then pinned down by gun fire)

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

How about The Two Towers?

In any case, even though I was disappointed with QoS in the theaters, I'm intrigued enough that I put it in my rental queue. As soon as it comes in, I'm going to watch both Casino Royale and QoS back to back to see if that makes a difference for me.

*shakes fist at Dot* I said the movies listed...

Anyways, moving onto another post... I agree with Suntory_Times about Daniel Craig's Bond. He basically said everything I could though, so I won't bother saying anything else.

[CampbellzSoup]

The plot was kind of hard to follow....anyone agree?

Also Blu Ray.com has it so wrong the picture quality is NOT perfect like Casino Royale

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by CampbellzSoup

Also Blu Ray.com has it so wrong the picture quality is NOT perfect like Casino Royale

Could you be more specific, i've yet to notice any flaws and have watched it several times.

[Devildog151]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Could you be more specific, i've yet to notice any flaws and have watched it several times.

I agree, we had some guests over and they all said it was like looking out a window and that they couldn't believe how good this movie looks.

[Jaguar007]

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

We watched 'em back to back. I think it's important. You can't be acutely tuned in to Bond's emotional state, if you haven't seen the CR recently.

That said, the David Craig Bond is a disappointment (as Bond). I prefer the Sean Connery Bond. Completely unemotional, they way you would expect a high level spy to be. Unattached from the women he targets and people he kills, and with a wry sense of humor. No baggage.

Craig's Bond parallels Jason Bourne too much. He has an agenda. It interferes with his work. The torment is in line with modern Superhero movies, a'la Iron Man, Spiderman, Incredible Hulk, Batman. It's just not James Bond to me.

Aside from that, both movies were immensely entertaining and fun. They just did not provide a James Bond fix, which is why I've bought all of the Bonds on BD, so's I can watch them when the wife goes out of town.

Actually Sean Connery's Bond was not completely unemotional. Is rage toward Tanya after the death of Kerim Bay in FRWL. M ad to scold Bond and tell him not to turn the Goldfinger situation into a personal vendetta after GF killed Jill Masterson. One of the greatest mishaps of the Bond series was due to a change in actors. It would have been great to have Bond go after Blofeld after killing his wife in OHMSS.

I hate it when people compare Bond to Bourne when all Bond is doing is going back to his roots in the Craig films. He is a bit more like the Bond in Fleming's books. Bond did get emotionally involved in his assignments on more than once.

[Sammy]

Originally Posted by CampbellzSoup

The plot was kind of hard to follow....anyone agree?

Also Blu Ray.com has it so wrong the picture quality is NOT perfect like Casino Royale

Yes, it was a bit difficult to follow for me and I got more out of it the second time. Maybe by the third time I'll put it all together.

I thought the pq was pretty good. Where did you see it as not being perfect?

[sfmarine]

PQ was outstanding but imo, there wasn't enough action. CR was loaded.

[PH3AR]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

PQ was outstanding but imo, there wasn't enough action. CR was loaded.

+1 P/Q was amazing, maybe one of the best PQ in all of blus, but i found there was plenty of action!

[EigeSan]

I saw Quantum of Solace on opening night in the theaters and I was very disappointed. I gave it 2/10. I found the story non-involving and actually fell asleep for 5-10min half-way through the movie. The storyline was slow and even the action scenes weren't able to connect to keep me interested.

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

Craig's Bond parallels Jason Bourne too much.

I agree with you.

Originally Posted by Jaguar007

I hate it when people compare Bond to Bourne when all Bond is doing is going back to his roots in the Craig films.

As a Jason Bourne fan it's hard not to compare this QofS movie to Bourne. There are too many similarities that cannot be ignored including: Bond purposely damages and smashes his get-away car (a $250,000 Aston Martin DBS!) during the chase scene. Bond jumping off roof-tops to balconies. More quick hand-to-hand combats and less gun fights. James Bond being monogamous (Wow!) with his love interest Camille Montes.

The director probably was trying to show Bond's roots by adding more of an edge with him but it didn't work well. Jason Bourne was a fresh concept for those movie viewers (such as myself and my Dad who was a long time Bond fan) who were annoyed at the same spy agent clichés and wanted something different. The Bourne Triolgy was an alternative that delivered. Obviously that success influenced QofS.

Bottom line, even if this Blu-ray's PQ is good I probably will not be watching it.

[sfmarine]

Originally Posted by PH3AR

+1 P/Q was amazing, maybe one of the best PQ in all of blus, but i found there was plenty of action!

It had action but it wasn't on par with CR. I think it's funny how he wrecked the Aston Martin in CR. Then Bond somehow gets the same car again.... I remember when the car was THE SHOW...The latest Bond's barely have the car as a character. It's a real shame.

[Jaguar007]

Originally Posted by EigeSan

As a Jason Bourne fan it's hard not to compare this QofS movie to Bourne. There are too many similarities that cannot be ignored including: Bond purposely damages and smashes his get-away car (a $250,000 Aston Martin DBS!) during the chase scene. Bond jumping off roof-tops to balconies. More quick hand-to-hand combats and less gun fights. James Bond being monogamous (Wow!) with his love interest Camille Montes.

I will agree that the editing in QoS is very Bourne like and I found QoS very middle of the road for a Bond movie, but all the actions scene similarities you mentioned, Bond did before Bourne ever did. Bond drove smashed up cars in FYEO and AVTAK. The roof top chase in Bourne is almost an exact rip off of the roof top chance in Tangiers in The Living Daylights. The early Bond movies also had more quick hand - to - hand combats and less gunfights like From Russia With Love and On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Bond got less physical with the casting of Roger Moore (and continued with Brosnan) because Bond was played by a less physical actor than Connery/Lazenby and now Craig.

[zahinn]

I wish QoS would have more reason behind the action -_-...but I do enjoy action .. But the film editing was a mess for QoS...The scene chooses new angles every few seconds. That got very annoying. Its as if the editor had ADD or something.

Despite everything QoS was a good ACTION movie..the plot....not so much :P
But its not half bad if you watch it right after watching Casino Royale. =]