SPECTRE (2015)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
User avatar
Posts: 16015
Joined: June 2011
Location: New York City
Vader182 wrote:
Peace wrote:
It's not THAT bad. The story makes sense to me. But man when most people watch it they are lost. At least the people I showed it to.
The story is the antithesis of making sense. It somehow has a paper thin story and nonsensical one simultaneously. It also is a shameless ripping of Bourne, only, photographed and edited to oblivion, missing the entire purpose of Bond as a character, something Skyfall perfectly captures. Skyfall, like Goldfinger, more or less is a vision of the definitive Bond, one old, one contemporary.

Cil, I call it pretentious because it has an air of self importance and dramatic weight it so obviously doesn't get in the boundaries of deserving.

And, Braked, no, it doesn't.

-Vader
Oh Image
Sigs???

User avatar
Posts: 11410
Joined: August 2010
Location: Texas
Vader what you said is pretty much spot on :lol: but Craig is better then Damon. It's fun to see Bond gritty. That first fight scene is intense. The way Bond looks away as the man dies. It's brutal. I liked it but I'm glad they didn't continue on that way.

I nee to proof read.
Last edited by Peace on February 17th, 2013, 3:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Say Girl

Posts: 422
Joined: January 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
I think all the "WORST BOND EVAR" nonsense surrounding QoS is exactly that (Moonraker, anyone? Octopussy? Man with the Golden Gun? Defense rests), but it is a flawed film, there's no denying it. I think it works best as a footnote to Casino Royale; not a complete waste of time (Kurylenko, in particular, is very good) but ultimately fairly minor.
Last edited by Amelia on February 17th, 2013, 3:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 9004
Joined: March 2011
The opening is great, but after that I lost interest. Seemed far too contrived for my liking.

User avatar
Posts: 26395
Joined: February 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Vader182 wrote:Cil, I call it pretentious because it has an air of self importance and dramatic weight it so obviously doesn't get in the boundaries of deserving.
I would say it succeeds where it tries to be dramatic, because the film isn't about some larger message, it's about the character of Bond and how the events of the previous film have affected him. His interactions with M throughout the film reflect that well because M effectively becomes a conscience for Bond, reminding him that he doesn't care who he hurts and he's causing destruction everywhere he goes. To people who say that it's not Bond, they're right, it's not Bond, and I've always seen that as the point of the film. He's not being Bond, he's being a more extreme and exaggerated, out of control version of himself. The entire movie is a representation of that.

Don't get me wrong, it's definitely flawed, the editing is a mess, it could have been better, however I would say it still achieves the purpose. The whole film is like a sucker punch and that was Marc Forster's goal. Like you said it rips off Bourne, but those action scenes are still quite brutal and effective. They're quick and cold just like Bond.

lol I can't help it, but I will defend this film as vehemently as RIFA defends religion
If she plays cranium she gives good brainium.

User avatar
Posts: 6272
Joined: December 2010
Location: Space Truckin'
I would like to see Bond visit Australia or Africa, for a change.
Image

User avatar
Posts: 8049
Joined: October 2011
Location: Chungking Mansions
Undoubtedly, he'll scale the Sydney Harbour Bridge while being pursued by terrorists or vice versa.

Melbourne is a cooler place in general but there's probably more stunt potential in Sydney.
Do you... like pineapple?

Posts: 459
Joined: November 2012
Cilogy wrote:
Vader182 wrote:Cil, I call it pretentious because it has an air of self importance and dramatic weight it so obviously doesn't get in the boundaries of deserving.
I would say it succeeds where it tries to be dramatic, because the film isn't about some larger message, it's about the character of Bond and how the events of the previous film have affected him. His interactions with M throughout the film reflect that well because M effectively becomes a conscience for Bond, reminding him that he doesn't care who he hurts and he's causing destruction everywhere he goes. To people who say that it's not Bond, they're right, it's not Bond, and I've always seen that as the point of the film. He's not being Bond, he's being a more extreme and exaggerated, out of control version of himself. The entire movie is a representation of that.

Don't get me wrong, it's definitely flawed, the editing is a mess, it could have been better, however I would say it still achieves the purpose. The whole film is like a sucker punch and that was Marc Forster's goal. Like you said it rips off Bourne, but those action scenes are still quite brutal and effective. They're quick and cold just like Bond.

lol I can't help it, but I will defend this film as vehemently as RIFA defends religion
THANK YOU for being perhaps the only person on these forums to actually understand the movie! You are totally on point with everything you just said. It DOES miss the purpose of the true Bond character, which was exactly the point of the entire film. Both Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace should together be viewed as the Craig Bond's origin story - a very dark origin story which portrays Bond as dark and revenge-driven. It's not until Skyfall that we see his Bond as the cool, level-headed, fully-formed, traditional Bond that we all know and love (even though Skyfall is not a direct sequel).

In Casino Royale he is young and impetuous.
After Vesper's death he becomes brutal and revenge driven in Quantum of Solace which was a natural progression considering how raw and volatile his emotions were shown to be in the first one. The point of Quantum was to show Bond go on this dark path of revenge following the death of the love of his life, all while M tries to set his conscience straight. Bond almost loses himself on this dark path, but as we see at the end of Quantum, he restrained himself and left Vesper's former lover alive for questioning, showing that Bond saved himself from his own vengeance. The last shot of him dropping the Algerian love knot into the snow was a beautiful shot that literally and metaphorically showed that he saved himself, forgave himself, forgave Vesper, and let go of all the feelings of guilt and anger that had been consuming him.
It is beyond me as to why Quantum gets so much hate - it's a beautiful story about revenge, forgiveness, and losing oneself on one's own path, and I feel that people blatantly miss these underlying themes which really do take multiple viewings to sink in. Any issues this movie has are due to rushed writing and editing due to the writers' strike. Yes, it's easily the weakest of the Craig bonds, but it is nowhere near the "worst Bond movie ever".

Even if you hate the story, it is worth watching just for Craig's gritty performance alone - he is at his most brutal and absolute badass best in this movie.

User avatar
Posts: 13377
Joined: August 2011
There's so much wrong with QoS, I don't even know where to start.
Brave New World

User avatar
Posts: 17534
Joined: May 2011
RyanRises wrote:There's so much wrong with QoS, I don't even know where to start.
forums/viewtopic
"It doesn't matter how you get knocked down in life because that's going to happen. All that matters is you gotta get up."

Post Reply