Quantum of Solace

[andy ide]

I saw this at the flicks when it came out and thought it was shit. Couldn't get my bearings at all during the action scenes because the editing was too frenetic -- one notch up from what Greengrass had done (brilliantly) with his Bourne movies and as a consequence it seemed like it was all over the shop.

I saw it again the other week on ITV and I thought it was great. I think this was because I was watching it on a 37in TV so my view wasn't flooded by the image, and because I'd already seen it once so the movie had, as it were, settled in my head. I found it much easier to follow and this time I thought the editing was very good.

All in all, an excellent film and a worthy -- and brave -- successor to Casino Royale. They were doing more than trying to clone Bourne. I think they were taking a cue from Point Blank as well -- the raw, lean revenge plot, the existential minimalism, the icy framing.

[Flat_Eric]

Another potentially good film that was ruined by "shakycam".

I detest "shakycam" and all this choppy, frenetic editing that's plagued so many movies since "Blair Witch" back in the late '90s. And all this bollocks about it being more "realistic" is utter cods - unless of course you're prone to shaking your head about violently when you're running, fighting, escaping from aliens or whatever.

And I don't buy into all this pretentious crap about it "harking back to French alternative cinema" or whatever. I don't fucking care what it harks back to. When I watch a movie I want to be entertained - which to me includes being actually see what's going on, who's doing what with/to whom etc.

As far as I'm concerned it's just an excuse for lazy and shoddy film-making, and if I know in advance that a film has been shakycammed to death (e.g. "Cloverfield", "Battlefield LA" etc.) just I boycott it.

It's as style that's now hackneyed, clicheed and has been done to death. Time to move on, and for any director still employing it to have "AMATEUR HACK" tatooed across their forehead in big red letters.

- Eric

[RoddersUK]

I thought it was shyte compared to other Bond movies. I am not keen on Craig either compared to Brosnan, who was the best Bond in my book, much better than the Jock tax exile.

[Flat_Eric]

For me it's

1) Brosnan
2=) Connery
2=) Dalton
4) Craig
6) Lazenby
7) Moore

- Eric

[bamboo]

I'm not overly keen on the huge amounts of 'humour' in the Bond films, the more ruthless and grittier the better for me.

I didn't mind the relationship between any Bond and 'Q' for a bit of comic relief but Moore's Bond and to a lesser extent, Brosnan's, just took the piss throughout the films.

For me, it would be;

1. - Dalton. !cool!
2. - Craig. !cool!
3. - Connery. !cool!
4. - Lazenby. !shrug!
5. - Brosnan. !hmmm!
6. - Moore. !clown!

[Gusset Sniffer]

Couldn't watch this shit. Each camera angle during the car chase seems to be something like 0.5 secs. Just annoys me.

[one eyed jack]

I totally agree with you on this Andy.

I first saw it in the cinema and left feeling non plussed and enjoyed it later on DVD immensely

I also agree that there is too much style over content when it comes to some modern day films.

Here we have special effects that work so seamlessly with live action but I preferred the narrative of the movies of old that relied on the story to carry it forward. You could overlook the matte lines and technical imperfections of the time because the story was more believable

Cases in point?

Star Wars. The first 3. The last 3 got so much criticism but i honestly dont think they are that bad as people make out and nearer to Lucas vision of how he wanted all the films

Planet Of The Apes the original vs The Tim Burton remake. Not bad but the original was more engaging.

No one cared too much for the terrible rare screen projection in Aliens when the story and action were good and moved at a good speed

[Ken Shabby]

I liked the Star Wars prequels. I mean they weren't as good as the original 3, but they're not as bad as some people say, either.

But when it comes to Bond, I prefer the older movies. Shaken, not stirred of course. And as for the girls....

Hey that gives me an idea for a new thread!

[steve56]

Its no good i cant watch when ITV show them too many breaks stupid ads too tried to watch Midsomer Murders the other night but 3 chunks of ads in a hour

[frankthring]

Andy Ide - you are so right in your first comment. I went to see it with Lara
Latex and the frenetic editing style gave us both headaches !!! In fact I have
written to the producers saying, as a big Bond fan, how much I hated the
movie, which was low on thrills anyway, and how awful this kind of editing
technique is in action scenes.
It was first used by Ridley Scott in "Gladiator" and ruined the movie for me.
Wides are rarely used, action scs based on fast edits and frame jumps of
close-ups and a few medium shots. Scott in his more recent films has
thankfully stopped using this method (ie "Kingdom of Heaven" and
"Promethius"). It is, I think, going out of fashion.
Hopefully the new Bond has more thrills and stunts, shot so we can follow
what is going on.