Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Massawyrm thinks he might kinda like Daniel Craig as Bond if he can get over how awesome QUANTUM OF SOLACE is!!!

praying the first one wasnt a fluke by mygirleatsbannanas	Oct 31st, 2008 09:55:43 AM
Daniel Craig is the best bond since Connery
SECOND! by my liege	Oct 31st, 2008 09:56:12 AM

sounds kinda good by Rupee88	Oct 31st, 2008 09:56:13 AM
the love story in the first one was a needless distraction. Give us hot chicks, but Bond should bang them and not fall for them. He should be smarter and tougher than that.
Craig is a great Bond by I_am_not_the_droid_you_are_looki ng_for	Oct 31st, 2008 09:57:59 AM
That is all.
I can't wait to see this movie by rodnunley	Oct 31st, 2008 09:58:03 AM
With Craig's first go at the franchise I really felt like all my hopes of what a Bond movie could be were coming true. If they managed to improve on that first film at all I can't imagine it not being anything less than the best Bond movie ever. I think Craig is by far the best Bond. And I hope to god he keeps at these movies for a long time to come.
Rupee88 by onaps6453	Oct 31st, 2008 10:00:38 AM
The "needless distraction" in Casino Royale is the very thing that makes James Bond what he becomes... It's called story. Look into it.
Rupee88 by NateWave	Oct 31st, 2008 10:02:34 AM
I think the love story in Casino Royale was there to build character... It sort of explains why Bond is such a misogynist.
scooped! by NateWave	Oct 31st, 2008 10:03:06 AM
Yeah, what onaps6453 said.
Fuck yes! by Stuntcock Mike	Oct 31st, 2008 10:05:21 AM
2 weeks to go.
Fuck yes. Finally something to be pumped for! by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:05:26 AM
This looks bad ass. And I love the theme song.
Theme Song by rodnunley	Oct 31st, 2008 10:06:55 AM
The new theme song has got to be in the top five for best Bond songs. Just a bad ass tune for a bad ass Bond.
yeah its very good by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:08:02 AM
Right there next to Goldeneye and Diamonds Are Forever for me.
I think this is the FIRST positive review I've read by tylerzero	Oct 31st, 2008 10:11:17 AM

All the stuff that those anonymous people were complaining... by rbatty024	Oct 31st, 2008 10:11:38 AM
about, were some of the things that made the first film great. I liked the card playing. I also liked the fourth act a lot. It was very ballsy film making to move away from the basic action film story structure. After Connery's films, the franchise has always seemed hallow. Sure, there were a couple of movies I kind of liked, but not full heartedly. That finally changed with Casino Royale. Craig is easily number 2, and we'll see if he can best Connery.
This review made my day. by Angry Mike	Oct 31st, 2008 10:11:58 AM
When the third one comes out, you just might be able to make an argument for it being the best trilogy of all time.
card playing in Casino... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:14:13 AM
That is the one thing in that film that annoyed the fuck out of me. Far too much time spent on the card game. But then again-- I hate playing cards and I hate watching people play cards even more. And I thought it was goofy as shit they made it Texas Hold 'Em. Just out of place. Quantum-- no card games = FLAWLESS FILM
don't really fancy the Bourne comparison.... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:15:35 AM
I find those films repetitive and full. And Craig would rip Matt Damon's fucking head off with his bare hands.
I meant DULL not FULL by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:15:46 AM

But is it still a Bond film? by Seacor	Oct 31st, 2008 10:16:04 AM
Massawyrm, With the lack of style, glamor, humor, bond music, gadgetry, Q, moneypenny, witty one-liners, characterization, gunbarrel missing at beginning of film... the question I have for you is this... With all the changes they have made to the Bond world, is this really still a James Bond film? Could you put any other action star in the title role and remove the name of James Bond and have the film play just like any other action film?
"Major complaints" about CASINO ROYALE? by LoneGun	Oct 31st, 2008 10:16:41 AM
Personally, I loved all the card playing in CASINO ROYALE. There was a lot of drama in those scenes. And Bond's exceptional poker skills are why he even gets his mission. (In the book, the card game was Baccarat.) I think it would have been less compelling to watch Bond go from one action sequence to another. Also, the love story wasn't "sappy" but quite essential to the film. Her betrayal and demise makes him a harder, colder agent at the end. Anyway, I am heartened by this review and really looking forward to QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
I completely agree that Casino Royale is much better... by rbatty024	Oct 31st, 2008 10:17:12 AM
than the Bourne movies. I enjoyed them as stripped down action films, but they didn't take the same chances that Casino Royale did. Likewise, the films didn't reap the same rewards.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz by robamenta	Oct 31st, 2008 10:23:27 AM
casino rayale was sooooooooo boring. it barely even resembled a james bnd movie ive never understood why people want a gritier james bond..i love all the gadgets etc
I'll see it in 1 hour (Europe) by no-no	Oct 31st, 2008 10:26:26 AM
I was able to wait for the 5th showing (as it started at 9.30 this morning) but I can't wait anymore! Thanks for the review, it got me pumped.
Holy Smokes Massawyrm! by Darth_Kaos	Oct 31st, 2008 10:26:31 AM
Now you really got me fired up to see this joint! Craig is slowly becoming my favorite Bond, and from this review it seems he will become my favorite after I see the movie. My fears are now set aside in regards to Marc Foster taking hold of this movie. My favorite Bond Movies are -GoldenEye - Live and Let Die - But I have a feeling this one's going to replace one of them.
Massa by jamestewart007	Oct 31st, 2008 10:32:00 AM
I'll be pissed if you're full of it. This review made all my bad feelings for this movie go away and now I'm really looking forward to it. I cringed when Forester said he tried to put the humor back in Bond. And all I could think was a Roger Moore movie with brutal action. And Robamenta, people like CR because it what Bond is really like. He is just a guy who can take more of a beating than any other guy and shoot a gun damn well. Add in a little luck and a couple of women (far fewer than you would think!), and you have Ian Flemming's James Bond.
Bourne by nathan0774	Oct 31st, 2008 10:32:10 AM
I wold just like to say that the Bourne movies stole most of it's action from early Bond movies and what the film makers thought was missing from Bond movies. Either way Bourne is simply a rip off of Bond! Sean Connery's Bond had plenty of fighting in confined spaces!!
Complaints about CR by rogueleader66	Oct 31st, 2008 10:33:32 AM
Ok, I kinda get why people were complaining about the love story in CR, but, this is essential to the character, the fact that Vesper is killed is probably why he becomes a guy who just wants to bang chicks and toss them aside when he is done, with them. It seems logical that this is why he is the way he is, he doesn't want to feel the pain of lost love like he did in CR, so he becomes a player. Rock on 007!!!! Cannot wait to see Quantam, it's gonna rock. Visit my blog- http://movietalktime.blogspot. com/
Craig is the definitive 007 by sarajevobot	Oct 31st, 2008 10:33:37 AM
He plays the character closest to the way he's portrayed in the Fleming books. Connery's a blast as Bond but ya gotta remember that the Bond movies were, at the time, considered almost an Austin Powers-style parody of Fleming's books. Dalton was the first guy to play the character straight, but those movies weren't that great and Dalton didn't have the frightening charisma needed to pull off a literally interpretation of the character and still make it fun to watch. Craig does, and Casino Royale had a great tone and some of the best action I've seen in I-don't-know-how-long. I'm leery about this new one, but I hope it's good, because Casino Royale was freakin' awesome. It honestly was the Bond movie we'd been waitin' fer....
you are pushing things a bit much.... by j2talk	Oct 31st, 2008 10:33:41 AM
each time an actor takes over as Bond people have said that X IS Bond...and people by into it for a bit...then given time the Truth will out...Connery-the classic Bond, in the end his Bond came off as a bit of a thug, all brawn no brain, Moore-Smart but a bit Prissy, never really seemed to have any muscle and needed the gadgets to make up for it, Lazenby-ok, didn't really get the chance to make his mark, Dalton- stiff and a bit wooden in the role, Brosnan-right mix brawn and brains-good start,let down by unmemorable villains, Craig, back to Connery's thug, but lacking the charisma,humor and style of the original, both films while good action movies lack the key elements of the Bond Franchise..a BOND for the Bourne Generation....
I was getting worried... by photoboy	Oct 31st, 2008 10:34:28 AM
... that all the action scenes in the trailer plus all the reviews talking about the action scenes that this film would be a return to the excesses of the Brosnan era, with its invisible cars and CGI tidal wave surfing. Although I liked the pacing of Casino Royale, had no problem with the tense card game or the love story. So hopefully they haven't moved so far from the feel of CR that it's lost what I liked about it.
Casino Royale definitely had pacing issues. by Kid Idioteque	Oct 31st, 2008 10:34:29 AM
It's nice to hear that this one doesn't, but I'm so used to Bond movies being too long. That's part of their charm. I'm sure I'll love this anyway.
Casino Royale was a snore fest by ArcadianDS	Oct 31st, 2008 10:35:36 AM
The bad guy was stolen right out of Inspector Gadget, and please somebody tell me how they were gripping the armrests when that bearded guy was giving an audio sample from Poker for Dummies at the bar. "oooooooh, there are three spades on the table! ooooooh. If he has two more, then he probably wins. How riveting!" zzzzzzzzzzzz
Bourne didn't invent fighting in confined spaces.... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:35:57 AM
....so don't act like Bond is stealing from Bourne now. You see the fight on the train in From Russia With Love, Massa? Confined and violent as fuck.
PS: nuts are showing from under your skirt, queer. by ArcadianDS	Oct 31st, 2008 10:36:23 AM
just an fyi
the problem with the card playing by rodnunley	Oct 31st, 2008 10:37:19 AM
The problem wasn't that he played cards ... it shouldn't have been Texas Hold'Em. The whole point of him being used (in the book) is that not many people can play (and even fewer are good at playing)Baccarat. M didn't want to use him ... she had too. And the card scenes in the movie were shot so that a mentally challenged 5 year old would understand them. "oh ... he went all in. He could loose everything." Ugh. Just poorly executed poker playing scenes.
Seacor by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:37:38 AM
Thats an interesting observation. I've thought about this as well. How much can you remove from it and change it before it becomes an entirely different franchise, and not Bond at all?
Comparison to Bourne by The_Bat	Oct 31st, 2008 10:37:44 AM
Am I the only one that thought the Bourne movies were silly and overated? I think that Greengrass has an eye but the plots are irrelevent in those films. This very structure that Wym is talking about is the reason I find then tedious and actually makes me nervous for SOLACE. I hope that the Bond script is smarter and ANY of the Bourne films. I love Craig and want to see him on screen more often.
I just got excited for this. by HoboCode	Oct 31st, 2008 10:39:42 AM
Unleash the Bond.
The_Bat by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 10:41:07 AM
I totally agree. They were fun the first time but I have no desire to ever see them again.
Bourne had some good action, but... by rbatty024	Oct 31st, 2008 10:41:18 AM
for the most part the films were disposable. This doesn't mean I didn't enjoy them, but they all kind of blend together after a while. They should probably stop while they're ahead with just three movies.
Nothing says plot twist by ArcadianDS	Oct 31st, 2008 10:42:20 AM
like someone faking their 'tell' at a poker table. Oooooooooh, so clever.
will the whinging twats from danialcraigisnotbond.com by Gabba-UK	Oct 31st, 2008 10:44:20 AM
please stand up so we can properly humiliate the stupid tits!!! Saw it this morning and saying it's not as good as Royale is like saying vanilla ice cream is not as good as chocolate ice cream. They're two different flavours but they're both still ice cream..... and bloody good at that!!
I have not seen Casino Royal by DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET	Oct 31st, 2008 10:44:37 AM
count me as number 5. Don't know why I have not seen it.. But at the same time I'm not really into bond. Goldeneye was the last one I enjoyed. Sean Bean mostly... I won't go out of my way to see this one either. changed the channel when watching the last Bourne Film. Fucking boring..
Dracula, you should give it a try. by rbatty024	Oct 31st, 2008 10:48:59 AM
I agree that Bond has mostly sucked for decades, but Casino Royale is not just a good Bond film, it's a flat out damn good film. If you like action movies you will like Casino Royale.
HaHaHaHaHaHaHA!!!! by maddox	Oct 31st, 2008 10:51:24 AM
"it is identical in structure and feel to the Bourne Identity series" Well, that's where I stopped reading. That's all you had to say to guarantee this film is not going to be better than Casino Royale. ...and I thought the card playing, love story, and mysterious 4th act in CR was awesome. Obviously I don't know any better.
I hate the shakycam and strobe editing of Bourne. by Mr Nicholas	Oct 31st, 2008 10:53:20 AM
Why did they have to cross-pollenate? Bond is not Bourne. Everything is more elaborate. I enjoy the fight and stunt sequences of a Bond movie, but Bourne's sort of filming and editing will just ruin them.
P Diddy is Bond by DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET	Oct 31st, 2008 10:55:55 AM
Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That, Take That. It's All About The Pentiums Baby!
I'm down by ballyhoo	Oct 31st, 2008 11:00:46 AM
Can't wait for QOS.
So glad we can say there's a BOND better than CONNERY. by YotzVonFrelnik	Oct 31st, 2008 11:01:06 AM
I agree that Connery rocks all and owns much, but geez, I've been so sick of the idea for so long that NOT liking Connery makes you a heathen in the way that not liking modern war makes you unpatriotic.
Glad to hear a positive review by Raymar	Oct 31st, 2008 11:02:27 AM
Most have been lukewarm so far.
Before Goldeneye my last favorite bond was by DRACULA_WANTS_THE_AMULET	Oct 31st, 2008 11:06:16 AM
Roger Moores A View Too Kill. Duran Duran Opening Song, Mr Bean cameo. That She-Man Vamp, Demolition Man Music video, Boomerang- pussy, pussy, pussy pusssssssssssssieeee and fucking Christopher "Needs More Cowbell- I haven't killed anybody since 1984" Walken.
Real Bond by DaKnifeOrDaGun	Oct 31st, 2008 11:19:55 AM
Even if you aren't a Bond fan you have to give it to Craig for putting his all into the Bond character. Hell he does most of his own stunts which adds a seemless quality to many of the action scenes. You know thats him taking that fall and it does catch your breath. It doesnt matter that Bond may have borrowed from The Bourne movies. It's a form of flattery. Bourne was inspired from Bond and now it's returning the favor. Times change movies evolve. It's pretty remarkable that a franchise this old still has legs and can continue to give the new action genres a run for the money. Cheers to you Craig. Keep it going. When you leave the franchise people will be bitching how YOU can't be replaced.
Son of a bitch! by 433	Oct 31st, 2008 11:24:45 AM
Why the hell do we have to wait until November 7th in the US? Should have been released on November 007th, just like V FOR VENDETTA should have come out on November 5th!
A VIEW TO A KILL by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 11:25:02 AM
Man, who the fuck doesn't like that rockin' Duran Duran song? I forgot about that. That one is my all time favorite. Greatest fucking chorus ever! Until we dance into the fire That fatal kiss is all we need Dance into the fire, To fatal sounds of broken dreams
rockin. by frankenfickle	Oct 31st, 2008 11:26:36 AM
i'm there, and i'm buying it when it comes out too. twice maybe.
I'd take Casino Royale over any Bond since Spy Who by Stuntcock Mike	Oct 31st, 2008 11:26:55 AM
Loved Me.
The Spy Who Loved Me... by The_Bat	Oct 31st, 2008 11:28:59 AM
Is the best Bond song. I don't even remember the Duran Duran song. And I was there when they burnt SF city hall for the film.
If you don't like bond... by mighty boosh	Oct 31st, 2008 11:32:59 AM
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v= gIfSQW499Xc
Bourne now = Flint then by g-ride9000	Oct 31st, 2008 11:41:40 AM
Look there will always be the Saints, Flints, Bournes and Spy games. There is but one bond..and he can be played by and bad ass with a posh accent. The fact is some have played him better, and he is the arctype for all other spys in the movies. It's about how all these copycat movies are or aren't like bond. Are any of them as good as the best bond films? NO You can stop giving every intelligent person on the internet the idea that you are a complete chode. How? Stop comparing Bourne to Bond.
BNAT 10? by The_Bat	Oct 31st, 2008 11:48:52 AM
I love discussing Bond but where is the BNAT X list?
A solid idea... by Embeedeuce	Oct 31st, 2008 11:55:17 AM
...if only somewhat. Sharp writing, my brother.
The Saint by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 11:59:59 AM
I'm the only guy on the planet that liked the Val Kilmer movie. I always wanted a sequel. They need to restart that series. Very interesting character.
Not that good. Sorry. by King_Knut	Oct 31st, 2008 12:15:48 PM
Saw it earlier today at the Phoenix in Oxford. I suppose the best word to describe it would be "directionless". Marc Forster was a poor choice of director, tantamount to Fox's misstep of hiring Jeunet for Alien 4. Sure, Dan Bradley handles the action fairly well, but you've stopped caring by half an hour in. Leiter might as well not be in the movie, Mathis' involvement feels completely contradictory to his part in the previous film, and Gemma Arterton ought to be court martialled and shot for crimes against acting. Amalric does okay as Greene, although he is really given absolutely nothing of any significance to build any threat into his character. SPOILERS: The movie utterly failed to go in the ghostly direction many fans were hoping it might, and it doesn't seem to leave any doors wide open for a sequel in the same way as Casino Royale did. OK, White's still alive, but who gives a fuck any more? This film did nothing whatsoever to advance the franchise or plotlines.
Couldn't disagree more by Dr Gregory House	Oct 31st, 2008 12:19:08 PM
I usually dig the hell out of Massawyrm's reviews and opinions, but not in this case.
The film is a mess by migmog	Oct 31st, 2008 12:23:04 PM
You guys will have to wait 2 weeks for it. We will all still pay our money- it's Bond but nothing to savour here. Shame- feels abit like a Fox Senior Management guy walked in half way through the movie and said no more money until you put my daughter in it. \I hope the Directors Cut will show the "direction"
by migmog	Oct 31st, 2008 12:23:14 PM

Danny \|Glovers by migmog	Oct 31st, 2008 12:28:20 PM
hmmm the smell of fresh green leaves rising from the earth via a strong stalk PLA.....SURELY NOT mixed with a MTv attention span!!-have we seen the same movie or are you just easily pleased? Perhaps you are the Villain of the third film - either way enquiring minds need to know?lol
WOW! by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 12:29:18 PM
I'm a HUGE Bond fan even if many of the films are hit and miss, but... What's with the hate for the Bourne movies. I thought they were great and when the first one came out, I thought to myself "it would have been great if they made a Bond film this way". If I remember there was a lot of speculation at the time if Brosnan would return and I think there was even a rumour that a one shot was being looked at where they would make Bond retro. Anyway, I think there is a direct connection to the Bourne series (in feature films) and 24 (on TV) and the rethink of the look and feel of Bond for CR. And it worked: Brosnan's Bond films were successful and made money, but they were not blockbusters. All things point to QOS being a huge hit... at this point I'd say the film is almost critic proof.
King_Knut by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 12:32:07 PM
Really? That is shitty.
Codymr by migmog	Oct 31st, 2008 12:36:39 PM
The hatred as you call it is rather like those who love the Fantastic Four Comic and hope for a faithful and quality big screen translation, looking over at "The Incredibles" and thinking we have been out done here. Bourne inspired Bond to raise it's game and it's ok to like both folks - I do-lol
Don't be afraid to slap a "Spoiler" band around this topic by Cletus Van Damme	Oct 31st, 2008 12:39:26 PM
for those of us that want to stay pure.
Codymr by King_Knut	Oct 31st, 2008 12:43:08 PM
Yup. I dunno, it opened well, with a great driving sequence, but then the much-talked about White interrogation sequence was cut short by more unnecessary action just when it looked like it was going to get interesting. That affliction curses most of the film - whenever anything threatens to become interesting, along comes another explosion/chase/fight. One of the nicer, if slightly arty, beats in the movie is the gunfight/chase that intercuts with an opera performance, all scored by the opera itself. Reminded me of the Pyramids sequence from The Spy Who Loved Me.
I never understood, "Fuck Me..." by sott68	Oct 31st, 2008 12:43:27 PM

I never understood, "Fuck Me..." by sott68	Oct 31st, 2008 12:44:52 PM
Does that mean you want to be fucked? Fuck, I am stupid, so go ahead and F me. does it mean You are gay, Fuck me... Someone explain!
Fuck me... by just pillow talk	Oct 31st, 2008 12:48:09 PM
me neither. I'm psyched to see this now, as it seems to be getting more good buzz now. And I loved Casino Royale, and the 4th act was necessary in the grand scheme of the Bond universe to further understand his distancing from women and more of the cold hearted bastard he is.
Danny Glover 2 by migmog	Oct 31st, 2008 12:49:29 PM
Clearly Goldfinger is the best theme song Thunderball is up there too. A View to A Kill is ok but it is of its time where as the above two are timeless. T\|hey have higher production values. John Barry is on record as saying that Tom Jones passed out having delivered that final note in Thunderball - that's why it's on my list
baccarat vs texas hold-em by drave117	Oct 31st, 2008 12:56:09 PM
I always thought it was utterly stupid that baccarat was used as the game in the book, because baccarat isn't actually a game of skill. That's the whole point of it. It's a dick-waving exercise, where rich people show off how much money they can risk on a bet that has roughly the same odds as a coin toss, and just as much control over the outcome. At least Texas Hold-Em actually involves strategy and people-reading skill rather than pure luck. I have no problem with them changing which game Bond is good at, because it isn't actually possible to be good at baccarat.
Tom Jones passed out.... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 01:06:28 PM
...not just because of the final note-- but because of the fact he just finished up eating the asshole of 12 Swedish chicks before crawling into the recording booth.
migmog by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 01:10:08 PM
I'm with you on Thunderball-- because Tom Jones and his chest hair are all sorts of bad ass. But Shirley's vocals on Goldfinger really fucking annoy me. Diamonds is far superior.
Texas Hold 'EM by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 01:11:48 PM
Just dates the film with this current Poker watching generation of young kids thinking they gots all the skills from watching the fucking Discovery Channel Poker shows. Its fucking annoying. I can give a shit what game it was. But Texas Hold 'Em is just cheesy. Why not make it something exotic sounding at least?
Generic is the new ground-breaking! by Spandau Belly	Oct 31st, 2008 01:16:24 PM
Alright! Another Bond movie that just cuts and pastes from everything else on the market! I hate the distinct flavour of those "old" movies! I'm so glad that whole era of personality is done! Originality sucks, I hope they let the dude who does Family Guy direct the next Bond flick and we can finally kill off anything that aids in identifying Bond from any other movie. But what's with the original theme song? Couldn't they just remix The Dark Knight's score and get Nelly to rap over it? Since the rest of this movie sounds generic and forgetable, I'm going to let that whole original theme song thing slip as a mild infraction, but in the future try to keep that stuff under control, guys.
I loved The Saint too! by abovo	Oct 31st, 2008 01:17:19 PM

Spandau Belly -- I think I understand what you're saying.... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 01:20:04 PM
Willow is the greatest film of all time, and Tarantino needs to felate the barrel of a shotgun. Got it!
Massa, Craig is great, but Connery is best because by toadkillerdog	Oct 31st, 2008 01:21:58 PM
He combined all the elements of the Bond character into one seemless package. In the Sixties, Bond was suave, debonair, worldy, witty and deadly, and with Connery at the helm, you easily believed that he could make love to a woman one minute and klll that same woman the very next if duty called. And it did. And he did. Connery could do it all, was asked to do it all, and as much as I like Craig (he is my second favorite already moving ahead of Lazenby) he does not possess the charm or wit that Connery had. Craig is a great brutal Bond. But Bond is more than a killing machine. Bond is iconic because of what Connery invested in him. From the cars to the tuxes. From the casinos to the carribean. From the brutal beatdowns to the beautiful women. Connery will always reign supreme. There really is no comparison. It is not even close.
no, no, no Danny... by just pillow talk	Oct 31st, 2008 01:24:16 PM
He's not only saying that Willow is the greatest film of all time, but that Warwick Davis is the best actor of past, present, and future.
TYLERZERO by The InSneider	Oct 31st, 2008 01:26:21 PM
That's because the movie really isn't very good and I'm kinda shocked at the enthusiasm on display here. Trust me, this is a MAJOR letdown from Casino Royale in every conceivable way. An undeniable disappointment and a huge step backwards for the franchise. It has more in common with Brosnan's Bond movies than CR. Can't believe anyone in their right mind would call it awesome. Check out Devin's review at Chud for a more reliable take on the film. Sorry, Massa. Agree to disagree on this one, BIG time.
Warwick Davis should've been the new Nick Nack by Spandau Belly	Oct 31st, 2008 01:31:50 PM
And Quentin Tarantino can play Scaramanga as a more muttering chatterbox.
Hey, I liked the card playing by Freakemovie	Oct 31st, 2008 01:31:57 PM
Card playing and Bond go together. That was one of the things that made Casino Royale feel vintage and new at the same time.
I liked the Saint as well. by HoboCode	Oct 31st, 2008 01:34:06 PM
Good flick.
DANNY, cut it out man! by Stuntcock Mike	Oct 31st, 2008 01:35:00 PM
I'm trying to eat my fucking lunch over here. Your Tom Jones talk is making me choke on my chicken fingers.
I agree Freakmovie by toadkillerdog	Oct 31st, 2008 01:41:09 PM
The card scene was great. It is what makes Bond who he is, and not simply a retrofitted Bourne.
Any "Q"? by BizarroJerry	Oct 31st, 2008 01:44:50 PM
I'm just curios if there's any "Q" character to speak of yet? I realize we have yet to see him because they don't want to turn this into silly gadget movies, but spies really do have some cool shit to play with. A scene with "the quartermaster" doesn't have to be silly.
Bond is not a misogynist by Rupee88	Oct 31st, 2008 01:49:37 PM
He doesn't hate women. So he f*cks a lot hot chicks...how does that make him a woman hater?!...some of you are messed up in the head.
Spandau Belly by Rupee88	Oct 31st, 2008 01:52:31 PM
Yeah good point...it shows how sad things have become that I don't even have any hopes for a good story in this film. That is just too much to ask for these days. But I only go to the theater two or three times a year, so I am not the target demo.
when people say misogynist... by BizarroJerry	Oct 31st, 2008 01:52:32 PM
at least in Jimmy Bond's case, they mean he uses 'em and walks away when ever he feels like it. Granted, that's really more of a womanizer, I guess. Cuz he doesn't mistreat them. He just often dismisses them. Though he treated Vesper well in Casino Royale.
christ... by MamoVaka	Oct 31st, 2008 01:54:16 PM
misogynist's have sex with women all the time.. it has nothing to do with their level of respect or hate towards women in general.. As a matter of fact they use sex as a weapon against the women they hate so quite often.
christ... by MamoVaka	Oct 31st, 2008 01:54:18 PM
misogynist's have sex with women all the time.. it has nothing to do with their level of respect or hate towards women in general.. As a matter of fact they use sex as a weapon against the women they hate so quite often.
Wait no gun barrel sequence??? by TylerDurden3395	Oct 31st, 2008 02:06:45 PM
It's absence was forgivable in Casino Royale (although we kinda/sorta got one, but not in the traditional sense) but there better be one in QOS.
Lest we forget by peter skellen	Oct 31st, 2008 02:07:38 PM
This site gave Die Another Day a similar rave back in 2002. I saw QOS this afternoon and it's a plotless 100 minute action film that will give you a headache and have you looking at your watch after half an hour. Not quite as bad as 007 Magazine's Editor Graham Rye's 1/10 verdict, and incidently Rye has forgotten more about Bond than anyone here will ever know, but a loud mess of a film that, a la the third act of Brozzer's films, throws endless generic second-unit action at the screen to mask having no story. Daniel Craig is depressingly one-note and about as much fun as a knee in the groin after a hernia operation. He is truly THE Bond for fifteen year-olds who hate James Bond films and like using the word 'Badass' a lot. To repeat myself, the Bond of the books dislikes killing but will do so if ordered. He isn't f*****g Jason Statham. Contempt for the gunbarrel and the James Bond theme adds to the generic feel.
TylerDurden3395 by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 02:16:00 PM
*SPOILER* I've read that the gun barrel sequence happens at the end of the film for some inexplicable reason.
Craig promises Q and Moneypenny next time! by IAmMrMonkey!	Oct 31st, 2008 02:22:15 PM
http://tiny.cc/2nq5G
I guess that the reason the gunbarrel (SPOILER)... by IAmMrMonkey!	Oct 31st, 2008 02:27:12 PM
..occurs at the end is to show that he has finally become the Bond we all know. That would make perfect sense I think
Iammrmonkey... by TylerDurden3395	Oct 31st, 2008 02:29:35 PM
I thought that him saying "Bond... James Bond" at the end of Casino Royale was to show he had become the Bond we all know.
I guess he should say, Bournde. Jameson Bourne. by TylerDurden3395	Oct 31st, 2008 02:30:50 PM

IAmMrMonkey! by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 02:34:20 PM
Oh... very clever. That never occurred to me. Thx Mr Monkey!
The Boring Supremacy by Fitzcarraldo2	Oct 31st, 2008 02:39:16 PM
When I heard how good the Bourne films were I hired the DVDs. What a load of cak! Jason Boring. Zero personality, zero interst, just running around and fighting. Did anyone care aboout Jason Boring and why he was always running around and fighting? Yes, many of the scenes were well done but were reminiscent of the brutal (for the time) Bond/Red Grant fight in From Russia With Love.
I've never seen Supremacy or Ultimatum by TylerDurden3395	Oct 31st, 2008 02:42:58 PM
The first one didn't do anything for me so I stopped watching them. It's weird though how I'll stop watching the Bourne movies one the first one, but I will sit down and watch every single Leprechaun sequel that comes down the chute.
Gun barrel's at the end. Personally I loved QoS. by Novaman5000	Oct 31st, 2008 02:44:54 PM
It was great. Great action, great characters (though villain is kind of weak), just alot of fun.
No sappy love story? It's already less than Casino Royale. by Sith Witch	Oct 31st, 2008 02:48:00 PM
I'm of the opinion that Bond adventures should have even less over-the-top action and instead dig deeper into what makes Bond tick. When Fleming wrote his novels, he included pages of description on Bond's idiosyncratic hygiene, his creature comforts, his ritualistic-yet-practical routines in solitude. I love all those "down-beats" because they make the big stuff seem that much bigger when it arrives. If we're climaxing every five minutes then I can tell I'll very quickly become desensitized to it. If only Kubrick had made a Bond film...
Daniel Craig IS NOT James Bond by Damage_Inc	Oct 31st, 2008 02:50:51 PM
'Nuff said.
TylerDurden3395 by IAmMrMonkey!	Oct 31st, 2008 03:16:57 PM
It would make sense as this is a continuation of CR and, from what I've read in the various reviews, he's still in the process of "becoming" Bond. It's the only reason I can think of as to why they would do it.
Rupee88 - better late than never.... by www.valiens.com	Oct 31st, 2008 03:17:05 PM
You're right. That was a crap relationship handled poorly. That movie is waaaaay overrated. Then again, welcome to the world of Bond.
Did I watch different Bourne movies? by I Hope You Die	Oct 31st, 2008 03:17:56 PM
All these reviews keep saying Quantum is non-stop action "like the Bourne movies." Yet the Bounre movies I saw were non-stop brooding and phone conversations occasionally intercut with frenetically filmed scenes of going to a train station or meeting someone in a public place. That's not action. Moreover, the only bad part of Casino Royale was that the action sequences went too long, all the card playing and the love story were done to perfection.
Actually Daniel Craig IS James Bond by IAmMrMonkey!	Oct 31st, 2008 03:17:58 PM
It says so in the credits for Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace according to IMDB.
Fitzcarraldo2 - How dare you lie! by www.valiens.com	Oct 31st, 2008 03:18:33 PM
You know you couldn't even see what was going on in the 2nd and 3rd Bourne movies! So don't tell me they were boring! Boring? What the fuck were we even watching?!
I can't be the only one who loves Bourne AND Bond? by IAmMrMonkey!	Oct 31st, 2008 03:24:28 PM
I keep reading negative feedback about Bourne on these Talkbacks with people making statements about why one franchise is better than the other. I love Bond but I also thought the Bourne movies were great - it's one of very few film franchises that managed to make an almost flawless trilogy in my eyes (in fact, I prefer the third movie to the first which is a rarity for movies and me). Each of those movies was fantastic and there were some great sequences in there, from the thrilling car chase in Moscow to the brilliant sequence at the train station where Bourne is trying to manoeuvre both himself and Simon Ross (Paddy Considine) to safety. But that's just my opinion.
IAmMrMonkey! Your not. I love both as well. by Stuntcock Mike	Oct 31st, 2008 03:31:52 PM
Bond is not Bourne. Bourne is not Bond. XXX is not good.
Bond vs. Red Grant in the train compartment by NoodlesHahn	Oct 31st, 2008 03:53:10 PM
in From Russia With Love is my favorite hand-to-hand fight scene in the entire franchise. Fighting in confined spaces has always been a Bond thing. Can't wait for Quantum of Solace.
Bourne was looking for his identity by skimn	Oct 31st, 2008 03:55:44 PM
Bond is always in denial of his identity. Well kind of. How many times has he gone "rogue"??
Bond song: the great, cool and the feh by crankyoldguy	Oct 31st, 2008 03:59:28 PM
John Barry theme, entire Dr. No soundtrack ("underneath the mango tree....") and of course, Shirley Bassey (three, count 'em, three great theme songs) all rule #1. But also cool: Tom Jones Matt Munro Nancy Sinatra Macca and Wings Okay at best: Lulu Rita Coolidge Then, pretty good were: Carly Duran Duran and even Sheena Easton Terrible: Tina Turner (not her, the song) Sheryl Crow (ditto) Madonna (she's terrible half the time w/ 'her own' music Ah-Ha (Oh no) Gladys Knight Chris "has always been way, way over-rated" Cornell. We'll see about Jack and Alicia.
fuck Bourne... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 03:59:31 PM
...I can't stand the fucking character. They are well made films and the fights are fun. But fuck Matt Damon, and fuck that mopey ass pussy character. I could really give a shit if he walked into a room 10 minutes and someone shot him in the temple -- ROLL CREDITS. I really had no emotional connection to anyone in those films. Thats the difference.
and if they can't get Shirley Bassey again by crankyoldguy	Oct 31st, 2008 04:01:07 PM
maybe Amy Winehouse if she's still out of rehab, since she copped a good part of vocal style from Bassey anyway.
DGDB by NoodlesHahn	Oct 31st, 2008 04:02:37 PM
Next time I'll read the TB before posting. I defer to DGDB who mentioned From Russia With Love at 10:35:57 AM.
Bond would mop up Bourne by crankyoldguy	Oct 31st, 2008 04:05:14 PM
easily, even the Roger Moore Bond. Connery, Dalton and Brosnan would take him out quickly and then go have sex with the appealing Julie Stiles and Joan Allen together.
critics are morons this is the best movie of the year by earlfist	Oct 31st, 2008 04:06:31 PM
just got back from a screening. Firstly, I couldn't agree more with the review. I personally think this pisses all over casino. The whole movie is like one extended pre credits sequence. Imagine a that has that and some blackest of black humour. Craig is an animal. Short, tight and awesome. Bloated box office action fests beware. This is how it's. Done. Minor gripes. One character dies too early and it's hardly from Russia plot wise. DANIEL CRAIG IS JAMES BOND.
NoodlesHahn -- best fight ever.... by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 04:10:44 PM
sloppy and raw as fuck.
Yeah this film... by davebaxter1989	Oct 31st, 2008 04:24:06 PM
...is fantastic. Saw it tonight (Britain) feels good to get it first.
Re: From Russia train fight by skimn	Oct 31st, 2008 04:28:34 PM
And to top it off, it was Connery fighting Robert "fucking Quint" Shaw, looking built like a brick shithouse. CLASSIC
relationship between M and Bond by Cedar_Room	Oct 31st, 2008 04:29:49 PM
in the novels - it develops it a lot further and the bond they share (no pun intended) is quite substantial and has never really been explored in the films. I like that they are playing this up - it adds a lot more depth than having M as Bond's surrogate father forver telling him off like a naughty schoolboy. When you're constantly dealing with death, and putting people into harms way - you would develop something deeper than most casual work colleagues so it seems only natural that the relationship between the two is an important one TO THEM. All in all, its things like this which really show character development in the Bond reboot and make me very thankful they've gone in this direction. Can't wait to see QOS now.
More "Bond fighting in a confined space" scenes... by Nasty In The Pasty	Oct 31st, 2008 04:33:44 PM
Roger Moore and the hook-handed dude in Live & Let Die and Moore vs. Richard Kiel's Jaws (EEGAH!) in The Spy Who Loved Me...both of which share the weird distinction of being in train compartments, like Connery vs. Robert Shaw From Russia With Love.
Also forgot to mention... by Nasty In The Pasty	Oct 31st, 2008 04:34:34 PM
...Connery fighting that guy in the elevator in Diamonds Are Forever (the ONLY decent scene in that movie).
DGDB by NoodlesHahn	Oct 31st, 2008 04:36:25 PM
Absolutely. It didn't rely on choreography or editing, just two cold-blooded assassins doing their job using their environment in a natural way. Reading your comments about the characters Bond and Bourne I tend to agree with you. Bourne is pretty much Brosnan's Bond. Highly capable but too sensitive to really survive more than a couple missions. I'd love to see an action star without a conscience again. I hope Craig makes a hundred Bond films.
Nasty by skimn	Oct 31st, 2008 04:47:38 PM
You have to give Diamonds credit for Natalie's sis Lana Wood's onscreen appearance, with her special attributes.
I know Lazenby gets a lot of crap for IHMSS by skimn	Oct 31st, 2008 05:20:09 PM
But I rewatched it this past weekend, and though he and "Kojak as Blofeld" are the weakest links, it still has some great skiing stuntwork and the ending never fails to get me teared up.
thats nice, now somebody make a BOND film... by j2talk	Oct 31st, 2008 05:30:18 PM
can we get a Bond film, now that they are done "reimagining" things for the new millennium....
I saw it by vadakinX	Oct 31st, 2008 05:40:36 PM
I saw it. I reviewed it. I gave it a 4 out of 10...very disappointing.
@ angry mike... by orange cinema	Oct 31st, 2008 05:40:49 PM
best trilogy of all time?! dude, come on. i'll just throw out lord of the rings and wook's revenge trilogy off the top of my head - both easily beat this series. yes it is an amazing series, but not the best ever.
Remember kids: by JumpinJehosaphat	Oct 31st, 2008 05:52:10 PM
Every movie made sucks. Nothing is ever good ever ever, and I'm here in the talkbacks to yell my fool head off about it!
JumpinJehosaphat by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 05:53:57 PM
LOL
Fighting in confined spaces by Massawyrm 1	Oct 31st, 2008 06:04:10 PM
Once you guys see the film you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. It isn't the FACT that they are fighting in a confined space - it is the way the fight progresses and is handled. It all should look very familiar and the comparison will be self evident. I in no way believe or intimate that this is a creation of the Bourne series. Just that the way it is handled here is borrowed from Bourne.
Does he sit in a shower and suck on a chick's fingers? by Snake Foreskin	Oct 31st, 2008 06:18:21 PM
'Cause nothing says mysoginistic, cold-blooded killer better than a dude sitting in a shower, sopping wet in a tux, sucking the blood off some bitch's digits. You think Snake would've done that pussified shit? No! For one, because he didn't want to get his mullet all watered-down! James Bond is a pansy and you know it! Although I suppose he is pretty tough for a British guy.
What about farting in confined spaces? by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 06:18:46 PM
A favorite of mine during the holiday season.
Snake Foreskin by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Oct 31st, 2008 06:21:24 PM
After all the McCain racism against Asians going around-- I swear to Christ I thought your title read "Does he sit in a shower and suck on a chink's finger." Needless to say I just spit my skittle. Fuck...last red one.
I just can't say he's better than Connery by br1947	Oct 31st, 2008 06:24:28 PM
I can't, but Casino Royale was damn, DAMN good. Never liked Moore or any of the others, just Connery, but Craig has definately knocked it out of the park. As far as I'm concerned, there are TWO James Bonds. What I'd love to see in the next one is Connery in a cameo role talking about his days as 007, basically revealing 'James Bond' as a codename that has been passed like a torch.
BRING BACK Q AND MONEYPENNY ALREADY by Earthquake WestCoast	Oct 31st, 2008 07:15:44 PM
Q could easily work. It would bring some much needed humor. They can do it so it's not cheesy, but actually fun. And the gadgets could work too. Look at THE DARK KNIGHT. Batman used gadgets in a cool way. You know that MI6 has cool tech, along with other nation agencies. They can bring John Cleese back as Q, this would lighten Daniel Craig's bond up a little. After all, isn't he human? doesn't he feel emotion such as anger, love, sadness, and laughter? We've seen all the other emotions except the more light hearted side of him. If Bond is always a dark, depressing guy in all his films, then it's going to get old quick. THE OTHER BOND FILMS ARE CLASSICS UP TO THIS DAY. BECAUSE BOND WAS A LIKEABLE CHARACTER THAT PEOPLE CARED ABOUT. Craig is a good Bond, but I'm afraid if we don't see the lighter side of him soon in the third film, then people are going to get bored. DARK FILMS are the in thing now, but...you can only remain in the dark for so long before the light comes in.
Firesale by tubuku69	Oct 31st, 2008 07:27:24 PM
Anyone into Star Wars check out my fire sale on ebay-getting rid of everything to try and pay the bills-bargain basement pricing but every penny counts in these dark times... http://tinyurl.com/5hw7o8
Earthquake Westcoast by odo19	Oct 31st, 2008 07:31:12 PM
Craig said Q would be in the next Bond. Someone up there had the link. I'm going to go ahead and say it should be played by Hugh Laurie, if for no other reason then that it will insure that he will always be able to get work.
But who would play Q? by IAmMrMonkey!	Oct 31st, 2008 07:32:40 PM
It's a shame that they already managed to waste John Cleese. He would have been great.
Yeah, here's where Craig talks about Q and Moneypenny by IAmMrMonkey!	Oct 31st, 2008 07:33:56 PM
http://tiny.cc/2nq5G
IAMMRMONKEY by odo19	Oct 31st, 2008 07:38:19 PM
Actually now that I think about it. Maybe it should be Ian McKellan.
There was always a Bond better than Connery... by workshed	Oct 31st, 2008 07:55:51 PM
...and he was called George Lazenby - the Bond Lovers' Bond. O.H.M.S.S. has never, repeat NEVER, been topped. Best Bond, best tunes, best Bond girl (Rigg), best 'mountain lair' and the best car/chases/baddie/plot etc etc etc. Now leave it out..!
The Problem With... by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 07:59:55 PM
Q & Money Penny is that they appeared in nearly EVERY film even if the story didn't demand it (although Q never did show up in Live & Let Die). An occasional cameo once in a while works well, but sometimes it brought the pacing of the Bond films to a complete stop. sometimes less is more.
Pacing Issues? FOURTH ACT? by captain_kirk	Oct 31st, 2008 08:07:17 PM
You know, one of the coolest parts of that movie was that we're in a position where we expect some type of closure and watch as Bond is totally f*cked over while in a state of lessened sharpness. I agree it was an odd moment, but it was a great finish to the movie.
Simon Pegg as Q. by captain_kirk	Oct 31st, 2008 08:08:21 PM
Why the f*ck not? Make Q more pissy.
Gary Oldman as Q by Seacor	Oct 31st, 2008 08:43:23 PM
He mentioned it an interview a few months ago that he would jump at that opportunity if it presented itself.
Seacor by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 08:55:31 PM
Oldman as Q would be brilliant casting! He can play it quirky or straight. It never would have occurred to me to cast him in the role.
Oldman as Q... by captain_kirk	Oct 31st, 2008 09:04:56 PM
Great if he's Oldman from True Romance
Oldman as Q... by captain_kirk	Oct 31st, 2008 09:05:12 PM
Great if he's Oldman from True Romance
Next Baddie: Ian McKellan by captain_kirk	Oct 31st, 2008 09:08:46 PM
Perhaps he could develop some type of device...an electronic, no electromagnetic...magnetic device. And they could call him: Man-gnet.
captain_kirk by codymr	Oct 31st, 2008 09:33:02 PM
That is the funniest fuckn' thing I've heard all day. Thx
Wrong wrong wrong: Bond was not inexperienced in CR by kabong	Oct 31st, 2008 09:45:45 PM
"why people were complaining about the love story in CR, but, this is essential to the character, the fact that Vesper is killed is probably why he becomes a guy who just wants to bang chicks and toss them aside when he is done, with them. It seems logical that this is why he is the way he is, he doesn't want to feel the pain of lost love like he did in CR, so he becomes a player Bond, in the novel, was a "player" before he met Vesper. Bond was more mad at himself for not realizing she was a Smersh infiltrator, but that the fault of the Head of the Soviet Desk, who directed her. There was no great poker in CR. Bond got a lucky draw. Quantum is the other part of CR, apparently, the part with all the good Bond stuff -- I hope.
Hugh Laurie as Q is a GREAT idea by Nasty In The Pasty	Oct 31st, 2008 10:58:57 PM
And it wouldn't even interfere with his House gig because he could probably knock off a Q scene in one or two days. Also have a new M in the next film who introduces Bond to "my new secretary, Miss Moneypenny". But who to play a secretly besotted, mousy-yet-appealing Moneypenny?
David Tennant as Q. by thedarklinglord	Nov 1st, 2008 12:35:24 AM
Since he's not going to be Dr. Who anymore. He wouldn't quite have the cranky, stiff, seriousness of Desmond Llewelyn, but he can play serious, even dire, when needs be. Plus, he can definitely come across as a slightly hyperactive, somewhat eccentric, imaginative fellow who clearly loves his work at crafting creative gizmos and gadgets - the sort of chap who's maybe just a bit too unpredictable and unhinged for field work, and thus his talents are put to better use in a laboratory.
Saw it last night and was a little disappointed by Mr Writer	Nov 1st, 2008 04:11:57 AM
Great opening title sequence and the song actually works in context, action-packed from the first minute to the last, super stylish, and extremely fast-paced, I also liked the "new" Spectre in the form of Quantum. BUT there was definitely something missing. It lacked the emotional resonance of Casino Royale and the script was so stripped down that at times it revealed the plot to be extremely flimsy. If the action sequences borrowed heavily from Bourne's car chases, hand-to-hand fights and rooftop battles, the scriptwriters seemed to follow Ultimatum's "make it up as you go along" style plot. You can get away with a flimsy plot is the character development is strong, but there just wasn't enough here. Bond has very few introspective moments and his relationship with M ends just as it started. As with Casino Royale she inexplicably loses faith in him in the middle of the movie then does a U-turn at the end. Bond too isn't particularly changed by the end of the movie either. Sure he's learned a couple of new things, but I didn't really buy the revelation about Vesper and he certainly doesn't have any closure. And while this may be intentional its as unsatisfying for the audience as it is for Bond. And while most of the action is spectacular the end seemed to come too soon and felt a bit anti-climatic. I was definitely disappointed by the reveal of Dominic Greene's masterplan too. Even by Bond standards it was not only silly, which is forgivable, but unfortunately slightly dull. The Bond girls were pretty and stylish, fun at times, but overall a little shallow, which pretty much sums up my thoughts on the movie. It was Bond. It was action-packed. And I enjoyed it. But there was something hollow about it.
Oldman & Laurie by DiamondJoe	Nov 1st, 2008 04:23:45 AM
Jesus, that's a couple of fucking great shouts for Q - take a bow gentlemen. With either of those 2 actors I could totally buy into the reintroduction of Q. If they just make him the bumbling tit that Cleese was it won't work. As for Moneypenny - Emily Watson? Samantha Morton? Can't believe some people dig the song though, it fucking sucks ass.
Nice balls, Massawyrm... by Dead Megatron	Nov 1st, 2008 04:51:30 AM
...That said, I have to say I liked the card playing and the misterious fourth act in Casino Royale. And the sappy love story was necessary to establish the character (such is the woe of origin movies)
Bill Nighy As Q by IAmMrMonkey!	Nov 1st, 2008 05:54:36 AM
Okay, I've probably just spelt his name wrong but I reckon Bill Nighy might make a good Q. P.S Captain Kirt - Man, that was awesome. You made me chuckle there.
Um, I meant "Captain Kirk".... by IAmMrMonkey!	Nov 1st, 2008 05:55:55 AM
Damn you AICN and your lack of an edit function.
Buuuuullshit on the TDK casting Prosser.. by DiamondJoe	Nov 1st, 2008 06:26:27 AM
..How can you say that the casting is wrong? Fuck, Oldman, Caine and Freeman are three GENIUS casting choices for the supporting characters. Especially Oldman - a guy known for playing total batshit-crazy psychos all his career suddenly playing the most decent man in Gotham City, and you totally buy it. And yeah, Caine is just playing Caine, but that's all he needs to do. You totally accept him as Bruce Wayne's surrogate father and there's a warmth in the relationship that you didn't get from the other movies because they spent no time establishing it or fleshing it out. Alfred was always just fucking hanging around with the odd line or two and apparently, miraculously building all of Batman's high-tech shit for him off screen.
Is it me? by garypleace	Nov 1st, 2008 06:39:37 AM
Im a bond fan and no-one is more happy than me to see this franchise rebooted in style - but not ALL the style is appreciated! I rtalk about the stupidly relentless and hyper-editing style that leaves you completely out of the loop dramatically as you strain to get any reference points on the scene you are viewing. By the time you work out where a characteris/was/has done then the moment has gone! Peter Hunt PLEASE come back from up there and take these computer-game playing nerds away from the edit suites!!
The only Fuuuuck Me is how dull QoS was by Brody77	Nov 1st, 2008 06:47:06 AM
Saw it last night and I was gutted. And I wasn't alone - NOBODY leaving the cinema (and it was sold out) was talking about the film! I've never seen that before, a hall leave quietly from the showing. You may as well have digitally stuck Jack Bauer in there instead of 007. As others have said - now can somebody please make a Bond film?
Saw it - it rocked by wildphantom07	Nov 1st, 2008 07:46:08 AM
Brody77 - your sold out audience would have had alot of mainstream goers there that are all about the jokes and the wit. Me, and I think alot of people on these boards, want this stuff taken seriously. This is a pissed off Bond on the rampage. On a technical level it is absolutely fuckin awesome. Guys, it will blow your minds. I LOVED it. I enjoyed Casino Royale, but this is the most daring Bond movie since early Connery. Exhausting, brutal - doesn't insult your intelligence. A ride. If word of mouth is mixed from a mainstream that want it to slow-down and get more jokey then so be it. This is a proper James Bond spy movie. Be excited.
Really good. by Keith Maniac	Nov 1st, 2008 09:09:26 AM
I watched it last night and it is really good. Maybe just a tiny little smidgen behind CR in the quality stakes, but only just. Creepy villain, check, multiple and unusual locations, check, blistering action, check, gorgeous totty, check, best Bond since Connery, double check. Don't get over excited, don't watch clips, just avoid it until you go and watch it and if that works for you as well as it did me you'll love it.
I grew up with Moore, and thought he was by Grammaton Cleric Binks	Nov 1st, 2008 10:22:59 AM
the best. But, as I matured I realized how campy he played it. Don't get me wrong, I like Moore, but looking back I'd have to say my favorite is not him, or Connery. It's not Brosnan or Dalton though both were respectable. Craig was great, but I liked one hit wonder George Lazenby. After seeing On Her Majesty's Secret Service a few times over the years I realized he is the least campy, most mature Bond. I don't know why they didn't use him again.
Sounds good by DarthDillweed	Nov 1st, 2008 11:06:46 AM
But why no mention of the Trek trailer, give us the goods Massa!!
wildphantom07 by Brody77	Nov 1st, 2008 11:50:30 AM
Can't agree there - I'm a huge bond fan, and I didn't talk about it. I doubt the hall was full of these "mainstream" people whose opinion doesn't seem to count. The film is not technically awesome by any stretch. In fact, I think it's a goddamn mess. Who edited this, Stevie Wonder? I love Casino Royale, but the fact seems to be that Marc Foster is pish at action scenes. Compare the freerunning chase from CR to any scene from QoS - not even the same league. As a side note - when did MI6 buy the console from Star Trek TNG? Lastly - the theme tune is still a piece of rancid shite.
SAW IT. LOVED IT. by caltsoudas	Nov 1st, 2008 12:08:13 PM
I'm shocked to discover that all these reviews have been DEAD wrong. I don't know what the hell these critics are talking about. The only disappointment is the opening credit sequence. This is so refreshing in the way that it's been shot. This is not a blockbuster action movie, it's an arthouse action film. An action told with new stunning visual language through perhaps the most impressive cinematography I've seen all year since The Wackness.
by caltsoudas	Nov 1st, 2008 12:25:30 PM
Also... It's hardly comparable to Bourne. The only similarity I can think of is the very quick editing style, which I enjoyed here. But it has a refinement, a finesse, if you will, that Bourne lacks. I also thought that the character development and plot were satisfying. It was just delivered in a non dumby-proof, less is more kind of way. A lot of things comes across through the visuals rather than through anvil heavy exposition.
The new Q should be by earlfist	Nov 1st, 2008 01:01:02 PM
David Mitchell
PEOPLE ON THESE BOARDS THAT ONLY WANT SERIOUS FILMS ARE... by Earthquake WestCoast	Nov 1st, 2008 01:24:31 PM
entitled to their tastes and opinions, but....MOST PEOPLE WANT a James Bond film that is fun to watch, and they want James Bond to be likeable. Not some dark, brooding depressing guy. James Bond FILMS (not the books) are SUPPOSED to be escapist entertainment! That's why the connery and Moore films were so great and why millions of people became fans!
BOND DOESN'T HAVE TO BE JOKEY. IT JUST NEEDS TO BE FUN. by Earthquake WestCoast	Nov 1st, 2008 01:31:48 PM
The Daniel Craig films are NOT a proper Bond film. They're BORING ART FILMS! Most people aren't Self-hating geeks that only enjoy dark films, most people want to go to the movies to escape the reality of the darkness that life is giving us right now. It's fine for a film to have DARK moments, but for a James Bond film to be so boring and dark is a crime. Bond isn't Batman!
OK Bourne, adequate Bond by rabidratboy	Nov 1st, 2008 02:16:18 PM
The music was not good, but neither was the editing. A Bond movie where the theme and gun barrell don't come in until the closing credits just don't cut it. You could watch the superb CR and Bond 23 or whatever it will be and miss nothing plotwise, because the plot doesn't move forward much if at all. The climactic 'fight' with Mr Green is piss poor, which is a shame. The number of shots that just don't match up at all is hack filmaking. Craig is good, but it could easily be any of the other JB's about these days.
VERY misleading review by Sinnerman	Nov 1st, 2008 02:27:49 PM
Don't normally disagree with Massa but I do on this. Loved Casino Royale but very dissapointed with this. This film completely fails to get the balance right, sacrificing story and er just about everything to do with James Bond. Craig is excellent but the direction is sloppy. Action sequences that you don't make sense and er that's about it. Where Casino Royale quite brilliantly avoided playing the bond theme until the credits to emphasise the fact that Bond had evolved into the character we know and respect during the film and now desrved the theme, in this the lack of bondness is just frustrating as hell. As I said Craig is excellent but they should let him be Bond not Bourne. This film is utterley charmless and just not a Bond movie.
Dissapointing Film by The Penultimate Gunslinger	Nov 1st, 2008 02:31:06 PM
A generous 6 out of 10 from me. Not awful, just not great.
I can only assume you Yanks have... by BiggusDickus	Nov 1st, 2008 03:10:26 PM
...a different cut of the film to us Brits, 'Cos I've just got back from seeing this and, frankly, it was dull. Not a patch on Casino Royale. Five out of ten at best. Apparently, this is the shortest Bond film ever made. It didn't bloody feel like it to me...
it wasn't disappointing in the slightest... by wildphantom07	Nov 1st, 2008 03:23:07 PM
I stand by my technically astonishing statement. I thought the way the film was edited was stunning. Exhausting, but hugely impressive. I'm not going to criticise the movie for not being what it isn't. They never set out to charm our socks off; but to assault our sense. This one is going to split audiences right down the middle. But kudos to Forster and co for not playing it safe and sticking to what is an obviously paved out plan of movies. This is merely the next chapter in a huge story arc.
Mamma Mia! has become the biggest British movie ever by IAmMrMonkey!	Nov 1st, 2008 03:26:13 PM
I'm getting out of this country.
Excellent film, see my awesome review by Chris Wood	Nov 1st, 2008 03:49:47 PM
Saw it yesterday and it rocked! Here's my review: http://tinyurl.com/6hcvn4
I just saw it tonight - excellent by Ray Gamma	Nov 1st, 2008 04:54:28 PM
I'm gonna stick my neck out and say it's better than "Casino Royale". Daniel Craig IS Bond now, the whole film was perfectly cast, and the unravelling of this mystery about just who the fuck this new organisation is, was handled cleverly and kept you hanging on the edge of your seat. I love the new Bond style, and I also love the fact that this Bond CAN get hurt. The whole thing has made the stakes feel so much more real and the 'world' in Quantum of Solace feels like they are painting a new canvas with a backdrop of secrets and it is riddled with creeps, liars and sinister groups. It was perfect. Yes, better than Casino even.
bond shouldn't be fun and light by gomez33	Nov 1st, 2008 05:11:43 PM
read the fucking books you retards, He a fucking killing machine who fucks alot of women. Theres nothing remotely fun about the character, that was added for the films. Craig is an excellent Bond, the closest you'll get to the books and the film was good, i think it suffered a bit from a shitty bad guy. Also watched one of Brosmans films the other day and he beat the shit out of someone with a towel. What fuck thinks Bourne came up with those close quarter fights with random objects, Bond's been doing it for over a decade.
Die another Day shit by gomez33	Nov 1st, 2008 05:12:59 PM
it was the worst Bond film I've ever seen.... ever.
Nobody cares about the books? by IAmMrMonkey!	Nov 1st, 2008 05:32:46 PM
Really? Then why on the talkbacks for Casino Royale were people protesting the change in the card game? Or when you say "nobody" do you mean Hollywood? I think you're wrong there too. If they didn't care then they wouldn't have rebooted the franchise with a story BASED ON ONE OF THE BOOKS? Why did Casino Royale not get such critical and commercial success if not for the fact that it felt more like the Bond from the books? What I actually think you mean, when you say "nobody" is "I don't care about the books". Which is a shame because you'd probably enjoy reading them.
dioxholster by IAmMrMonkey!	Nov 1st, 2008 06:30:24 PM
And there I was thinking that the studio had gone back to the books because the movies had become criticised for moving too far away from the original Bond movies (i.e the ones based on the books). But you obviously have insider information that I don't so yeah, I'm an idiot.
Bond in the movie medium has been mostly shit by odo19	Nov 1st, 2008 06:38:01 PM
Until Craig. You know it's true.
Dioxholder by odo19	Nov 1st, 2008 06:40:48 PM
LOl, so the previous Bond films, which were all rehashes of each other where the exact same thing happened in every fucking movie, were original then? God your fucking stupid.
Dioxholster I meant by odo19	Nov 1st, 2008 06:41:21 PM

Craig is Connery's Bond turned up to 11.. by quantize	Nov 1st, 2008 08:19:58 PM
...which is why he is perfect..and people who dont buy him as Bond are way more into the poncy, campy cocktail version than they realise. Moore was funny, but never cold like Connery.
Solid movie - but feels a bit transistional by TurdontheRun	Nov 1st, 2008 08:24:05 PM
Just got back from seeing Quantum of Solace. Its good - not Casino Royale good - but it'd easily make the top 10. they haven't blown it. Craig is as good as ever - even more brutal and uncompromising than in CR - although given the nature and structure of this particular entry he's rarely given time to breath and demonstrate the more emotional beats that's he capable of and that really fleshed out the character in CR. there's one bit involving a character from the last movie where he does and its a bit of a shock because he's been so relentless and single-minded up to that point. but his absolute no bullshit approach to the role continuse apace. The thing about this movie is that it feels like a bridge between CR and stuff to come - his character arc here sort of dictates that the movie be a bit one-note and furiously paced. he still has some way to go on his journey to becoming the fully-rounded embodiment of the character (as well as uncovering the larger plot and villains of the Spectre-like 'Organisation'). so, without rambling on further, what this means is that Quantum is a good Bond movie that lacks the extra colouring of CR, but promises a lot more to come. I was left wanting more, but then that's probably a good thing. oh, and Massawyrm, anyone who dismisses the romance in CR as a 'sappy love story' or unnecessary,really didn't understand that movie at all. it was an absolutely essential component of it.
I agree....fuck the books. by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD	Nov 1st, 2008 08:54:50 PM
They are great literature. But the books are the books. Its a whole different thing. They have never been a direct adaptation like say Harry Potter-- they are more inspiration.
You know how we can trust the "I just saw it" reviews? by Johnny Law	Nov 1st, 2008 09:03:16 PM
Because they spell it "organisation."
Johnny Law by TurdontheRun	Nov 1st, 2008 09:14:22 PM
I'm from the UK so yes, it can be spelled OrganiSation, instead of OrganiZation (just like prioritise or any similar word), if that indeed is your pedantic point. And yes, I'm also aware that we find out in the movie that the Organisation is called 'Quantum'. now if you're casting doubts on whether I saw it or not (and its sometimes difficult to tell online), I can assure you I have - the movie is on general release in the UK right now (US release 14th Nov I beleieve?), so you can put that shit to bed, jack. Or perhaps my opinion didn't match what you've decided the movie's going to be like? but that doesn't mean someone is lying.
FORGET THE BOOKS! by Earthquake WestCoast	Nov 1st, 2008 09:25:05 PM
The only reason people were protesting the change in the card game in Casino Royale on the talkbacks is because....it's a website for fanboys! Fanboys of Bond HAVE READ the books! The millions of mainstream Bond fans HAVE NOT! If the connery bond films were like the books, it would NEVER of been a hit. There wouldn't of been of 40 years of Bond films. People DON'T WANT A SUPER SERIOUS BOND. They WANT A BALANCE BETWEEN SERIOUS AND FUN!
CHECKED OUT THE OLD BOND POSTERS OF THE PAST by Earthquake WestCoast	Nov 1st, 2008 09:28:44 PM
All the Connery, Moore Bond films posters made the movies look entertaining. Bond with girls-Check! Bond with gun-check! Bond surrounded by bad guys-Check! Quantum of Solace poster looks like an ad you see at MACY'S or some gay perfume ad in Cosmo. The poster doesn't make someone who never seen a Bond film want to go see it.
BRING BACK SPECTRE by Earthquake WestCoast	Nov 1st, 2008 09:30:49 PM
Bring back SPECTRE for the organization. Quantum sounds gay for an organization's name! You know it does, unless...you're gay, then you probably like it.
Absolutely by wontyouletmeknow.	Nov 1st, 2008 10:29:07 PM
Absolutely the first positive review I have read. And I am going with it. Very pumped.
How have so many people already seen this? by SmokeFilledTavern	Nov 2nd, 2008 12:34:40 AM
Just once I'd like a movie to be released to nobody in advance. So there could be no false hopes and superficial hype. The truth is...there is a lot of negativity out there about this film. That's a bad sign. AICN tends to favor anything that's a big franchise. They will find a way to like it. Go in with hope, but stay realistic. It could be as bad as you've heard.
The endtimes must be here... by odo19	Nov 2nd, 2008 01:19:29 AM
because I think I just heard people on AICN say fuck the source material of a franchise!!
Agreed about The Shining by odo19	Nov 2nd, 2008 01:31:38 AM
And I'm a Stephen King fan. However, if you are going to deviate from the source material that much then the movie should at least be good. Not boring campy shit.
Sounds like TOTAL FUCKING DESTRUCTION!!! by Motoko Kusanagi	Nov 2nd, 2008 03:45:31 AM
Cool.
dioxholster by wbrownley	Nov 2nd, 2008 04:10:28 AM
if u want aliens, there's always Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
SAW IT...LIKED IT...SO THERE!!!! by Russell T Davis	Nov 2nd, 2008 04:40:16 AM
Saw QOS yesterday - I thought it was a bold direction to take for a Bond movie after CR -it would have been so much easier and predictable to take a straight forward CR like approach to this story but full credit to everyone for not only making a different Bond film but an excellent action film as well. My only gripe is that the action is too fast and frequent - it needed another 20mins additing to it in order to develop the characters & storyline and to pace it right. The pre-credits sequence is done very well ,we're straight into the action and the song fits in very well (I had my reservations). SPOILER ALERT: Yes as mentioned the gun barrel is at the end but when you watch this movie you understand why - we now have Bond as we know him and he's ready to make some major in roads into exposing this organisation. I would agree with the critics who say that this feels like the second film in a trilogy - this story is in no way finished and is set up beautifully for the next film where I am sure some more familiar elements of the Bond series will be introduced as per the gun barrel at the beginning. So enjoy, try not to dissect the story too much (otherwise you will fell frustrated) and let's wait for Daniel Craig's finished version of the Bond character in the next film. James Bond will return....
crankyoldguy by kwisatzhaderach	Nov 2nd, 2008 08:25:31 AM
It's a-ha, not ah-ha. Duh. Just saw the film, its ok. Bad guys are rubbish and the whole thing is a bit underwhelming. The first half hour is a BLATANT rip off of several action sequences from The Bourne Ultimatum. I had no idea what was happening in the opening car chase, the geography is very confusing. Coolest sequence was the opera sequence. Forster has added some nice arthouse touches. Way better than any of the Brosnan films so no reason to complain really. Broccoli and Wilson need to think about what direction to go in now though. The writing is the weak element, there's no memorable dialogue on the go here. Time to jettison Purvis and Wade and get some good writers in.
Sweetness by toxicbuddha	Nov 2nd, 2008 08:46:25 AM
I am geeked over Craig as Bond. And as much as everyone carries on about Sean's take, go back and watch those films without your 60's glasses on: He's smacking bitches around and generally being the world's most dangerous pimp. Yes Connery had a manly smoothness to him, but his treatment of women is so buffoonish it's almost a parody. I love the fact that this new iteration is taking it back to the foundation and showing you what makes Bond what he is.
Yeah, Connery's Bond was a bastard by BillEmic	Nov 2nd, 2008 12:49:24 PM
but he was just so cool. You wanted to be him. Craig's Bond is too tortured to idolize. But I still like him a lot, 2nd only to Connery.
The confind Space fisticuffs is sooo Bournish... by FILMFUNK	Nov 2nd, 2008 03:40:43 PM
I think he even grabs a pen!(what the hell!? i mean shoot it kinetically in the bourne style done't lift actual bits!!!) but the Skafolding fight is franticatastic! I don't like the old Bond movies so to me Daniel Craig is way the best bond simply because he's in the 2 best Bond Movies I've ever seen no matter how cool Connery is Daniel craig is a superb 007.
"From Russia With Love" book and movie by kabong	Nov 2nd, 2008 04:39:10 PM
are very much alike. What annoys me is people who like Crapsino Royale saying that it's faithful to the novel; no, it's not. Then other people say they like Crapsino Royale because it's not trying to follow the novel. What both groups mean is that they like Crapsino Royale . . . because it was a chick flick . . . with some action added.
the next title--- by captain_kirk	Nov 2nd, 2008 05:49:23 PM
In all seriousness, I think the broccoflower clan will be recycling past titles. And why not? Casino Royale was used at least 1 x before. Why not start with Never Say Never Again just to piss off McClory
Once again, Massawyrm is completely... by deanamatronix	Nov 2nd, 2008 07:14:34 PM
incorrect. Way off the mark. Couldn't be more wrong. Quantum of Solace is an incoherent mess. Bad direction, sloppy editing and a horribly muddled script. A really bad film. End of story. www.criticalmassreviews.blogsp ot.com
Oh, and one more thing... by deanamatronix	Nov 2nd, 2008 07:15:42 PM
... I really like Craig as Bond. Shame he has this muddled mess as his follow up to the genuinely entertaining Casino Royale.
Craig is a GREAT BOND for this era. by Continentalop	Nov 2nd, 2008 08:38:01 PM
I hate bringing up one of the worst clichés, but Daniel Craig works as the Post 9-11 Bond. It is easy to imagine him as an ex-SAS agent now recruited into MI-6. The scene in Uganda where James is shadowing Mollaka seems like something out of Blackhawk Down, or seeing a CIA SAD agent like Johnny Spann in action. Sean Connery (who will always be my James Bond) was perfect for his era, representing a Kennedy-esque figure: dashing, charming, and intelligent, yet dangerous and cool. It wouldn’t be hard to imagine Sean’s Bond winning Britain’s highest medal for heroism on a PTO boat. And yes, I know I mentioned two American events (9-11 and the Kennedy presidency) but lets not kid ourselves, American events probably shaped James Bond in the movies more than almost any British event has.
Casino and Quantum aren't REAL Bond... by pdennett316	Nov 2nd, 2008 08:56:51 PM
They don't follow that particular series' conventions at all, instead 'borrowing' a style from the Bourne movies. Nothing wrong with that if, like me, you weren't really into the older Bond movies. While they aren't REAL Bond in that sense, CR to me was a beter Bond. I really enjoyed that movie a lot, probably due to the Bourne-yness of it all. I hope this one follows suit, I really do. But to argue that the new Bond isn't lifting wholesale from Bourne is a hollow argument. The Bourne trilogy was incredibly successful, the Bond producers looked at the underperforming Bond's of recent times and changed direction. If it wasn't for the Bourne movies, this Bond wouldn't exist. If it wasn't for the Bond books...Bourne wouldn't exist. Wierd!!
Bond needs a mentor in the next movie by Manatee	Nov 2nd, 2008 09:12:36 PM
An older, more sophisticated agent (with perhaps a shadowy motive or two) needs to teach Craig's Bond the finer points of being a 00. I think this could provide an emotional jolt, while setting up Craig's fourth and final installment as Bond.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B jDjxI0Fbzk by ReelMan	Nov 3rd, 2008 01:56:52 AM

Saw it last night.. by DiamondJoe	Nov 3rd, 2008 05:14:39 AM
...and its good, but not great, and its really a bit of a missed opportunity. They've basically reverted to type - daft plot, explosions, an indestructible Bond (unlike the human being from Casino Royale), hideout going up in flames at the end. Oh, and a truly shit song. It has some nice touches and good scenes - everything with Mathis, for example, and the scenes between Bond and M are all excellent. But its too loud, fast, crash-bang-wallop. None of the subtlety or elegance of Royale, and it doesn't involve you the way Royale did. From the first scene you just think, hmm...explosions. Still, Craig is terrific, and so is Olga Kurylenko or whatever she's called. Couple of BIG fuck ups: Why are any shady government depts like the secret service always protrayed as having the kind of computers NO ONE IN THE FUCKING WORLD HAS, with Matrix-style user interfaces and holographic projections? Fucking pisses me off no end when they've touted this Bond as grounded in reality. Also, I won't spoil anything, but I think killing off one of the characters was a big mistake, as they could have been an effective recurring ally. All in all - could do better.
Respectfully by Die_Hardest	Nov 3rd, 2008 05:43:18 AM
Go back and watch From Russia With Love, or Goldfinger. Connery is the best Bond. I do agree with whoever was espousing Lazenby's merits. He was great in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but Connery will always be the best Bond. That being said I though Craig was fantastic in Casino Royale.
Seen it twice and it is sh!t by Mr_P	Nov 3rd, 2008 06:30:08 AM
Had tickets in advance for both showings. Direction is awful and Foster needs his shaky cam rammed up his erse. Couldn't see a thing that was going on, I have seen the scene with the boat chase twice now and still have no idea what Bond did and noone I have spoken to does either. I love Bond, DC is my 2nd favourite Bond and I have never ever said anything negative about a Bond film so soon after seeing it (often living in denial for months where Brosnan was concerned) but this was seriously awful. I am so gutted and disappointed it is incredible. At least the Vesper killing herself sits a bit more comfortably now and the story is probably ok but the action sequences gave me a headache both nights and really ruined it for me. Put me in the mood for watching a Bond film which this most certainly did not feel like. Oh and one last thing the mood in the cinema at the end as people got up to leave was very very flat so it wasn't just me - and my date, and my friends who thought it was disappointing.
kabong with respect... by codymr	Nov 3rd, 2008 06:48:02 AM
I see you point, but I think what people are getting at when they say that the "CR film is faithful to the CR Fleming novel" is that elements of the novel were transposed in the same spirit that is the novel... but that it is not a carbon copy of the original material. Sure it was updated and events were dropped or moved around in the narrative, but much like Peter Jackson's LOTR trilogy, the spirit of CR was faithful to the book. Especially considering many Bond films share absolutely nothing in common with the original novel other than the title... including QOS it seems.
It's Amazing ! by Dude_gimme_tabs	Nov 3rd, 2008 07:44:27 AM
Saw it yesterday and I think it's amazing. The more I think about it, the more bits of genius I remember. Starts with a hell of a bang and never let's up. Craig is beyond great in this, and every scene with Judi Dench is a marvel. The consensus in the office here is that it was great, only that it maybe could have been 15 minutes longer and used this time to have a teeny bit more exposition, particularly around Mathis and Bond at the end of the 2nd act. It is tough as hell (as it can be for a 12A certificate). Craig's opening 2 lines - directly pre and post title sequence - are fantastic. And I really, really thought he was going to pull that trigger during the fire at the hotel scene with Camille. The way he deals with Greene is brilliantly realized and his confrontation at the very end with a certain Algerian, the quiet menace being exuded from Bond, makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up.
MR P.. by DiamondJoe	Nov 3rd, 2008 08:27:49 AM
..Agree with you on the boat chase, I couldn't tell what the fuck was going on. Or in the opening car chase. And I saw it in a packed theater and the mood was flatter than a witches tit at the end.
Mood by Dude_gimme_tabs	Nov 3rd, 2008 09:00:14 AM
I think the mood is subdued at the end because it's not nice. It's bleak, it'as dark. It's not happy, there is no floating off into the sunset playing tongue hockey with a hot as hell Bond girl with a midget captive strapped to the mast. People are dead, Bond has been fucked up completely. He may have drawn a line under the Vesper situation but he has found found his measure of comfort (Quantum of Solace) is not in a woman, but it is in a fairly repellent job with very few friends who can really be trusted. When he walks away from M at the close of the movie he is till not on a good place.
Mood by Dude_gimme_tabs	Nov 3rd, 2008 09:00:19 AM
I think the mood is subdued at the end because it's not nice. It's bleak, it'as dark. It's not happy, there is no floating off into the sunset playing tongue hockey with a hot as hell Bond girl with a midget captive strapped to the mast. People are dead, Bond has been fucked up completely. He may have drawn a line under the Vesper situation but he has found found his measure of comfort (Quantum of Solace) is not in a woman, but it is in a fairly repellent job with very few friends who can really be trusted. When he walks away from M at the close of the movie he is still not on a good place.
A 'grown-up' review that ringer truer than bullshit by Mr Gorilla	Nov 3rd, 2008 09:11:24 AM
(THIS WAS WRITTEN BY PHILIP FRENCH IN THE UK SUNDAY PAPER 'THE OBSERVER') The director, his cinematographer, editor and writers have set out to outdo the Bourne trilogy, and the picture sacrifices everything to maintaining a breakneck speed. The camera moves with dizzying rapidity, the cutting is frantic. There is no coherence, humour, affection, reflection.
Bourne Supremacy was fun, Ultimatum was boring by Mr Gorilla	Nov 3rd, 2008 09:22:05 AM
Yo do eventually need story, characters who have relationships and who you can invest in, humour etc. A dude running around kicking people in the face will eventually get boring.
Connery IS BOND by DarfurOnTheRocks	Nov 3rd, 2008 10:01:44 AM
The reviewer fails to understand that Craig's portrayal of 007 needs to evolve into Connery's. It is all good and cool for 007 to make mistakes...... on his first mission. However, he cannot continue to do so as his character progresses. He will become suave and debonair. He needs to. The review needs to give Connery his due and respect the filmic 007.
Chris Pine IS Capt James T. Kirk by DarfurOnTheRocks	Nov 3rd, 2008 10:05:21 AM
Why is it that everyone automatically assumes that origin stories are guaranteed to be stellar? I liked Batman Begins. I loved Casino Royale. However, that does not mean that everything prior needs to be diminished...
flaws?? CR was perfect! did not need more action by FleshMachine	Nov 3rd, 2008 10:56:40 AM
hard to top. too much action = yawn.
Action by Dude_gimme_tabs	Nov 3rd, 2008 03:38:26 PM
I dunno, this was was rammed and packed full of action but I still really enjoyed it. If this is a trilogy then it makes the perfect act II and set's up a great 3rd chapter.
Bourne films are great, Craig's Bond is Great too.. by CeejayNightwing	Nov 4th, 2008 12:58:01 AM
All the other Bond films before Casino Royale are mostly they're own interpretation of the character and apart from a few films, have very little of what the Books presented as James Bond. Because of that we have several generations of so called Bond fans who basically only know Bond from the films as some womanizing, gadget laden, sports-car driving English gentleman who keeps saving the world and getting the girl. Timothy Dalton was the first to get the character right but the time was not right to re-educate the public so the films flopped. Daniel Craig was more fortunate in his attempt and now we have a whole bunch of people who simply don't get what's happening. They're expecting traditional Bond film cliches and are instead being presented with the very human and vulnerable character from the books in a true progressive story which has nothing to do with saving the world every 5 minutes or throwing billion dollar gadgets at bad guys with secret bases and odd sidekicks. Bourne and Bond are completely different characters and stories. The Bourne films are about a man who is trying to redeem himself for his past activities with what little fragments he can remember. Bond is an agent with a license to kill and an objective to take down the organization that was behind the death of the woman he was hoping to marry. The new films higlight this as his driving force, a hidden agenda he can barely admit to himself yet it haunts his every private moment. By the end of QOS you'll see why the events of Casino Royale were ALL very important to the grand scheme of things. Bond overcomes being a blunt instrument in the first movie and in this film he overcomes his emotional involvement and aspires to true professionalism in his line of work. This is the second act of the chronicling of becoming the Bond that the world only glimpsed in little detail with some early Connery films and the Timothy Dalton Movies. If you liked Roger Moore of Pearce Brosnan, don't hang around too long, we won't ever be returning to the English head waiter type Bond who can't keep his dick in his pants! QOS is a supereb follow-up to CR, it has very tight, brutal action scenes directed with motion filled camera work similar to the Bourne films but not the same. The movie progresses the relationship between Bond and his allies for future establishment, Both M and Felix overcome their programming to allow Bond the leeway he needs to gain perspective on his path of vengeance. The unraveling of clues that are brining to light the existence and nature of the enemy organization they discovered from the first film, finally pays off at the end of this movie. It makes for a really eventful third act movie that will finally have Bond vs the powers that be from SMERSH (if they're still called that) with all the backing from his bosses at MI6 and his friends at the CIA. Forget what you think you know, lose all expectations and embrace the new Bond doing things the way they should have been done in the first place without making the character a cliched comic book!
Just the review I hoped! by onezeroone	Nov 4th, 2008 03:27:39 AM
Now, don't let me down. After I saw CR, my first thought was "Best Bond since Sean Connery"... And Bourne-ish Bond is not a imitation, but a reflection of the sort of spy who would live in a world like today. You no longer have a face for the "enemy" [not even Laden]. Earlier Bond was a relic of Cold War era... this new Bond, even though Bourne-ish, is a Bond of our times. If you wanna fight terrorism, you have to fight it out in those narrow alleys.
CeejayNightWing! Thanks! by onezeroone	Nov 4th, 2008 03:34:54 AM
Forgot to mention in my post, you summed up most of my thoughts pretty well there, esp the Dalton part.
CeeJayNightwing.... by Dude_gimme_tabs	Nov 4th, 2008 04:51:55 AM
.....has pretty much nailed it there! Pay attention to the man, he knows of what he speaks.
Additional point..... by Dude_gimme_tabs	Nov 4th, 2008 04:54:50 AM
Which is that by the end of QoS, M has FINALLY managed to start trusting Bond, his judgement and his decisions. This will lead to the relationship from the original movies where M just summons him to the office on Regents Park and then sends him on his way, free to accomplish his mission, his way.
Ahhh, so it's the 'middle one of a trilogy'. by Mr Gorilla	Nov 4th, 2008 07:57:39 AM
'Setting up things nicely for the next episode.' An excuse often used to excuse shitness - i.e. The Two Towers (listen to P Jackson's apologetic yak-trak on the DVD). People forget that good middle chunks do that - and manage to be brilliant films too. (Empire Strikes Back, etc etc)
the Quantum of Solace is no Casino Royale its a movie about indi by tazzzer	Nov 4th, 2008 08:58:24 AM
Hey guys, went to see this last night and boy was I and many others I think disappointed. There are somethings that I can accept being left out of a Bond movie (like the one liners) but what I expect first off is a bad ass opening sequence that delivers a punch. Instead we get a cool driving scene but no definitive punch at the end. Then cut to title sequence of what has to be one of the worst bond songs ever. I mean what the fuck? Ok so back to the movie and must say from here on for about 20mins theres some good action sequences that deliver especially bond on a rope shooting a bad guy. I saw that and thought now that could have and should have been the opener somehow. After which we go off on a journey all of the place which is cool in a way but the dialogue is sometimes difficult to keep up with meaning you get lost but have to just go with it hoping that it all makes sense in the end. The main bad guy doesnt really seem bad enough although I like the idea of exploring the idea of a global organisation exploiting that most precious of resource. I also liked being suprised that I didnt realise what that resource might be until into the film (I wont spoil it here by saying what it is) however, both Bond girls although beautiful never really give the film much. In-fact I didnt really care for their story at all although toward the end I did feel the main girl stuck in a fire for bond to save played well because of her past which comes out well in the scene. Theres a nice plane scene to and at this point I think I can conclude by saying this: This movie is about individual action scenes that do not always tie up well with some working better than others. The end sequence I felt was also dull and i came out thinking that ok I love that Bond has been reimagined, I loved what they did with Casino and I hoped this new movie would just kick ass Bourne Ultamatium style. It just doesnt and that is sad. Its going to make a shit load of cash of cause but thats more to do with the fact that people loved Casino and hoped this was gona be better. Its sad that it isnt but for all these problems let me also say this: Daniel Craig is a fantastic Bond. Totally ruthless in a way that has not been seen since Connery played the role. All I can hope is that in 2 years time we get a better script for him to go with. Finally let me also say the music soundtrack is uninspiring throughout as well. Lets hope next time is better! Oh by the way you come out the movie thinking of so erm exactly what is the Quantum of Solance? But if they do another one we may find out great!
CeejayNightWing by TurdontheRun	Nov 4th, 2008 09:21:19 AM
Well said, sir. I think you've hit the nail on the head. So many people don't have a clue what the character is really about, therefore its no surprise that there's complete confusion and surprise when the true James Bond is presented. Its like Batman fans expecting Adam West and getting Chritian Bale's authentic version of the character. Let them stick A View To A Kill in their dvd players one more time, and the rest of us will enjoy an accurate and mature portrayal of Bond for once!

Talkbacks

Massawyrm thinks he might kinda like Daniel Craig as Bond if he can get over how awesome QUANTUM OF SOLACE is!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks