|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
93.194.247.138
The best Bond of the new age, certainly.
The transformation is this time perfect.
Bond made it in the 21 century.
From the music, the digital " tricks " and the actors.
If the three original Bond ( Connery ) has still the charm of the " fin de siecle ) quite & easy, sexualyl load, animalistic, and living in a world of unknown, this one set in our time, a definitive rupture of the past.
I must say all here seems to fall in together, the witty dialog, the wonderful actress and even Craig seems to have found a way to surpass some of the time our favorite Bond.
But that was in another time and another place.
Excellent.
Follow Ups:
Not even close.
BOND: Cunning, shrewd, funny, witty, clever, evasive, charmer of women, disengaged when necessary, not outwardly cruel, creative outwitter, fights with some honor, survives with a little finesse, will hang around for the best punch line, captures the best in Brit humor, fights with skill and athletic quickness, manages by the width of a hair to pull off the job at least by the 11th hour, because at assignment's end, he'll be rendezvousing with a woman for more than just a sunset backrub in Acupulco.
CRAIG's BOND: Edgy, angry, rough, could survive a high profile diplomatic dinner only if pre-warned, and then scripted by his boss, carries that "hunted" look, gives you the impression he survived a brief bout of Crystal Meth addiction in the early 90s, some disdain for women and/or authority, but strong taste for revenge, fights with the intensity of a cornered dog, will also get the job done by explosion or force, stalks all remaining enemies, can provide a sharp verbal barb as needed, then just wants to get the hell out of the office and go home for a drink.
Bond: Sadistic novels. Playboy.
Graig´s Bond: 21th Century. Take it or let it be. But the spirit still there, even if in a stylisised form.
Whatever anyone thinks of the particular Bonds being played, can we all at least agree that Craig is the best actor ever to play Bond?
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
Craig the best actor ever to play Bond? I'd say no. I like the newer movies more so because of their being less..... cheesy. But I don't find Craig to be a good actor from what I've seen of him in the Bond flicks. To me he's somewhat Keanu Reeves-ish; not really much there, sorta like a plank of wood.
"But I don't find Craig to be a good actor from what I've seen of him in the Bond flicks."
I've seen Craig in other films - Layer Cake is good and so is The Ice House - and he plays different roles well, whereas Connery always plays Connery and Moore always plays Moore.
The again, I heard George Lazenby played Hamlet once to critical acclaim.
Just kidding.
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
Sean was not a very good actor, I just watch FRWL on BD, but boy was he sensuous and dangerous looking, like a wild animal.
The best actor to play Bond but not the best Bond...
I agree, Connery was the best Bond and all other Bonds are judged against him.I watched an interview of the guy who picked him to be Bond, and he was saying how he wasn't convinced after meeting Connery that he was the man for the job, until he and his secretary were watching Connery from the second story window walk across the car park to his car. The secretary sighed that Connery didn't just walk - he moved like a panther.
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
Edits: 06/07/09
Yes a predator.
Disagree ! My big problem with Quantum of Solace begins with headache creating fast-edits. Take the frenetic driving scenes: The short millisecond scene cuts are completely disorienting. I felt like it was a video game, not real flesh-and-blood action. Many of these short bursts and flashes at all angles and the uneven patched-together mosaics all just seemed like they were digitally fabricated. What, so no expensive cars would really be scratched? And the Bond car seemed to unrealistically self-repair itself, as it was digitally manipulated through it's virtual chase. What's with that? You couldn't get any reference point to judge the speed and danger in the car chase, or any similar action scenes, such as on the water. Because of this misguidance, you lose the intensity, it just becomes disjointed and disengaging. Pizza and fairytales, instead of the real hamburger.
After surviving the supposed action scenes in Solace, I was suddenly longing for the intensity of the chase scenes of The French Connection, or in McQueen's Bullit, or the original car scenes in the 1974 original of Gone in 60 Seconds, or the screaming cross-desert white-light intensity of Vanishing Point. The viewer felt involved, and could feel the grit of the danger and could get an almost first-hand taste of the brutal speed and terror.
Action scenes in Quantum came across as desperately overly spiced, with a lot of photoshopping around in the digital mall. By contrast in the few pioneering action scenes that I mentioned above, the actual film sets were extremely dangerous to be around. Many cars got destroyed, engines actually got hot. No fuzzy little blue screens upon which to backfill digital Bond car manipulations.
Imagine if we used the crystal clear high definition digital technology to record and edit real clean action, and left the cotton candy to Pixar instead? Even Brosnan's Bond car duels were so much more real. Or, am I just too old school, and I just don't get it??? You tell me!
I tell you.
I agree with everything you said. Mostly. With the biggest being I enjoy it, difference.
Now I wrote something like the best Bond of OUR ( present time ) time.
Yes we are old fashioned.
The best villain with Gerd Fröbe in any JB.
A brilliant appearance!
Trivia: "His mother is Polish, and was born in the village Roman Polanski had lived with his family before World War II."
See any resemblance?
(Almaric is terrific in "Munich" as well - a real spy story and one of my faves.)
Casino Royal was good, but the wheels came off of Quantum of Solace.The whole industrially designed incendiary hotel in the desert was just silly and there were far too many precious coincidences. In fairness, there were a few good scenes, but they were all thrown together without much thought of where they were going with the plot; the story was just far too illogical, without the suspension of disbelief crucial to making an action/adventure yarn work.
The ecological theme of greed and acquiring global resources was worthwhile if the story had made more sense, but after the first half of the movie it seemed like the writers were struggling to make the theme work in an action setting. Furthermore, the villains were rather mundane. No, Casino Royale was much better executed.
AuPh
Edits: 05/11/09
I just wonder.
I thought it was one of the weaker Bond films when my wife and I caught it in it's initial theatrical run, but the second time around didn't improve the film; in fact, it exacerbated it's flaws. Sure, the action looks great, but the plot made no intuitive sense whatsoever and even the action/suspense seemed horribly forced, especially toward the end. Other than the Goldfinger homage (oil covered girl on bed) the film lacked cleverness and got completely bogged down by one implausibly precious coincidence after another.
The bottom line: In a single viewing Quantum of Solace's pacing never slows down enough for the audience to clearly see the shaky logic, coincidences and other faults; in a second viewing they become painfully apparent. Casino Royale was far superior, IMHO.
BTW, the second time was the last Quantum of Solace for me, unlike the LoTR trilogy which is a masterpiece worthy of repeated viewings for those folks who appreciate epic fantasy.
AuPh
Hony soit qui..
if it wasn't for laughing with my friend at how bad it was we wouldn't have enjoyed those two hours at all.
"The man is only half himself, the other half is his expression." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Practically this kind of films are really not my cuppa. God knows.
Now tell me why I found it one of the best JB and you one of the worst.
the tension, excitement, and thrills slowly were drained from that first effort.
Q of S isn't cerebral and it doesn't try to be. Still, the denouement in the desert was a bit silly.
Well I did not like the Casino at all. Really silly. I wrote it here too.
Of course silly, but all Bonds are!
You take it or live it.
This one was a take away...
Too bad because Craig is excellent as Bond.
-Wendell
Curious is it not?
Yes, it is. We all react differently to film and music. I find Casino Royale to the be the superior film in every respect. To me, QoS was just another shoot'em up, nonstop action film. Different strokes.
-Wendell
I see your point. Casino was seemingly ( for me )more a film with pace, aka the long playing cards scene.
QoS is too music video with all the jumpy action.
(nt)
Without the " the perhaps " we would agree 100%, perhaps.
...he's the best non-Connery Bond but the two films can't hold a candle to "From Russia with Love" or "Goldfinger".
Patrick, I will watch it. I have not bothered til now because of poor reviews...
thanks
Phil
Thank you for our confidence, Phil, I hope you will not be deceived!
One has to accept that the mutation was necessary ( I needed time ) but the result is there.
Dialogs, philosophy, wit, and that beautiful Bond girl...
Bien sure for a man of my age, the...older Bond...Well...
and really enjoyed the beautiful cinematography. Also Daniel Craig is truly menacing as James Bond, he really has the rogue presence. Overall I enjoyed it, all the action is not really my cup of tea but mixed with the images and some witty dialogue a surreal trip indeed.
Not nearly the bomb the critics would have you believe.
thanks
Phil
Glad you like it.
BTW no ALL critics did not like it! A few days ago I made a search.
I especially liked seeing QOS just after "Casino Royal" as Quantum takes up just where CR leaves off - starting at a pace that may require computer game reflexes to keep up, and although the end finishes with a slow burn, it was satisfying none the less at the point ends were tied up with M.They are a superb pair when seen together - will satisfy a James Bond fix most readily.
Repeated viewings may be requred - to pick up all the tidbits and to appreciate how good they really are.
Edits: 05/10/09
And to say that this film is true to the spirit of the first JB films would also be a point.
Well as for the novels, no film until now can reach them.
Only one character could. Sean Connery.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: