New Bond Film - Quantum Of Solace

["Doc" Devereux]

New Bond Film has a title!

Quantum of Solace.

It's an authentic Fleming title, too, having been a short story in For Your Eyes Only. Now, where can I find that minute of footage?

 

[Smithy]

I like it Doc, that's catchy.

 

[Feraud]

Hmm, interesting. I recently read the short story and it has nothing to do with Bond himself. The story highlights the marriage woes of another couple.

How are they going to make this a Bond film for pop consumption?

 

["Doc" Devereux]

According to the article, the story picks up from about an hour after the end of Casino Royale, so I doubt that the story itself will see much input as far as the main plot is concerned.

 

[SamMarlowPI]

*SPOILER*

yah supposedly it picks up from Casino right after Bond shoots Mr. White in the knee...its going to be so cool...and it comes out in November! yes!! the only thing i'm kind of wincing at is "twice as much action than Casino". i thought Casino was great with the little action it had because it set a different pace than the Brosnan films. guess we'll just have to see.

 

[Brian Sheridan]

Ohhhh...I was really hoping for the title RISICO which comes from the FOR YOUR EYES ONLY collection. RISICO even deals with a drug smuggling operation which is thread of the plot of Bond 22.

I wonder if it will actually be titled that in the end. Remember they changed License Revoked to License to Kill because they found Americans didn't know what Revoked meant. "From A View to A Kill" became "A View To A Kill".

How many people will know what a quantum is, let alone solace? Oh boy!

My bet is that newly released pic of Daniel Craig in a boat chase will be the pre-title sequence taking place after he shoots Mr. White.

 

[AmateisGal]

YESSSSS.

I am SO excited (can't you tell? lol) for the next installment.

I have been a Bond fan since elementary school, when they used to run all the Bond films on t.v. and my Dad and I would watch them.

 

[Feraud]

Good point. Quantum of Solace does sound like an Edward Burns/Sandra Bullock chick flick.

 

[Smithy]

Well if Craig's performance of Bond in the last one is anything to go by (and provided the script's a goodie) I've got high hopes for it.

Craig has reinvigorated the franchise, and I hope they keep going in the same direction as with Casino Royale.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

That's a horrid title and will be very difficult to market anywhere. I hope they reconsider before the film comes out.

I was the lone dissenter on "Casino Royale," pretty much disliking the entire film.

I must admit, I went and bought the DVD last weekend and watched it through twice and I liked it much better.

One of my biggest criticisms was the sound mixing and the theater that I saw it in the sound was terrrible. I believe Deckard said the same thing; that Craig appeared to be mumbling and you couldn't make out a word the fellow said. Well, they either fixed it on DVD or it has a better mix. Hearing what he says has a big effect on the film.

Except in the love dialogue between Vesper and him, which was cringe-worthy. Much of what I thought was bad was still bad, but overall, I liked it on the subsequent viewings: it's stylish, compelling, and Bond is much more interesting, dangerous, and believable, in a wholly unbelievable way!

So, for the record, I feel better about it and hope the second one is along the same lines.

 

[K-K-K-Katie]

Bond is a Dad/Daughter bonding experience!

YESSSSS.

I am SO excited (can't you tell? lol) for the next installment.

I have been a Bond fan since elementary school, when they used to run all the Bond films on t.v. and my Dad and I would watch them.

I second your observation, Gal. Dad was a huge Bond fan, and we watched each and every movie each and every time they were on. Even now, when I went to see Casino Royale, my dad was watching with me, and we made the occasional comment during the film. Dad passed in 2000, but I could hear his voice in my ear. A girl's dad is her FIRST hero, but maybe Bond is second.

*snicker* OK, that's a horrible pun in the title line, sorry. I couldn't resist.

 

[Dr Doran]

Well if Craig's performance of Bond in the last one is anything to go by (and provided the script's a goodie) I've got high hopes for it.

Craig has reinvigorated the franchise, and I hope they keep going in the same direction as with Casino Royale.

I'm with Smithy. Sorry, Hem. I still love you and all ...

 

[Hemingway Jones]

I'm with Smithy. Sorry, Hem. I still love you and all ...

Except that I coudln't hear him, I thought Craig was one of the highlights! On watching it again, I really liked him.

Some of my criticisms can be pedantic. For instance, the pre-title sequence is in Black and White. The first thing you think of is "Flashback," because often B & W sequences are flashbacks, but then the film flashes back in a grainier black and white. Then you think "homage;" this footage must be an homage to when Bond was in black and white, but, except for some adaptations in the 50s, Bond was never in B & W. So, what's the point? It looks cool, but why? What is the film maker trying to say? I waited the entire film for them to tie the B & W sequence back in somehow, but it didn't. It was as if someone highlighted a chapter in a book for no particular reason.

That and, if I am Bond and some fellow wants to run up a construction site, I am waiting on the ground for him to come down. None of this hopping around nonsense.

 

[Feraud]

Maybe I should re-watch C.R. but...

That and, if I am Bond and some fellow wants to run up a construction site, I am waiting on the ground for him to come down. None of this hopping around nonsense.

Exactly!

It was this (and some other things I have now forgotten) that made me dislike Casino Royale.
To me the movie felt generic and uninteresting. Nothing we have not seen in a Lethal Weapon or Jackie Chan film.

The last two decent action films I can recall in past years are Way of the Gun and The Bourne Identity.

 

[Quigley Brown]

That title won't last.

 

[Edward]

I must get around to seeing Casino Royale... I hear intersting things about it. For the most part, I like the Connery era Bonds, but since then he seems too much of a dinosaur. Particularly by the Brosnan films, well, they were dumb fun and everything, but they'd become so totally self-parodying - seemed to me that was the only palce left for them to go. As for the invisible car nonsense..... euw.

I think, ironically enough considering I think of Bond as rather too dated for today, I'd be much more interested if they went back and remade them all as period pieces, accurate to the Fleming books that they were inspired by in the first place.

 

[Miss Neecerie]

I think, ironically enough considering I think of Bond as rather too dated for today, I'd be much more interested if they went back and remade them all as period pieces, accurate to the Fleming books that they were inspired by in the first place.

See...I like that they all feel slightly dated...he is -supposed- to be that way...

Its not supposed to be -just like every- action film out there...there are things that make it Bond...and the more they try to change that...the less i like them.

 

[Jovan]

Twice as much action... two Bond girls... this sounds like every single Bond movie from the '80s onward before Casino Royale. :eusa_doh:

Hemingway Jones: So you bought a movie you disliked? A rental or library checkout would have been less money, but glad you liked it better this time.

 

[Dr Doran]

Twice as much action... two Bond girls... this sounds like every single Bond movie from the '80s onward before Casino Royale. :eusa_doh:

:eusa_doh:

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Hemingway Jones: So you bought a movie you disliked? A rental or library checkout would have been less money, but glad you liked it better this time.

Yes, well it is part of the canon, so it's a must have. Plus, I am gearing up for another Venice trip and really like the shot of the sailboat going down the Grand Canal, which, in the real world, is an impossibilitiy. They must have gotten some special permit to do that scene.