The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[bjmdds]

Of course DCINB would only pick out the negative reviews. I know you're all giddy and all, but let's not count the chickens before they hatch.

Hatched? They've been plucked, deep fried and devoured, case closed.

[bjmdds]

http://www.expressandstar.com/2008/10/1 ... eaps-back/

Bourne without the depth

Lack of solace as Bond leaps back!

The mission: To attend the first screening in the world of Quantum of Solace, writes Sunita Patel.

The venue: cannot be revealed - classified information and all that . . . well, not really. The rendezvous was at the Odeon, Leicester Square, last night.

It was a tough assignment, but someone had to do it. The 22nd James Bond film picks up from where Casino Royale left off - so be prepared to be taken on one hell of a ride. Daniel Craig is back in his second 007 adventure.

But her Majesty’s secret service agent has turned from a loved-up puppy to a ruthless killing machine.

Nursing a broken heart, he is out to seek revenge for the death of his lover Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) with a licence to kill.

This is a fast and furious Bond - high on action and exotic location, but still mean and moody (he still does not care if his vodka martini is shaken or stirred).

For one thing he is too busy punching and kicking the living daylights out of everyone who crosses his path. One of the first scenes sees an angry Bond dripping with sweat in a car chase and sets the tone for the rest of the movie.

“You look like hell. When was the last time you slept?” asks M. There’s no response from Bond. Need I say more.

No-one can be trusted, and no-one and nothing is going to stop the new bullish and brutal Bond from exacting revenge.

There were rumours of a James Bond jinx on the set of Quantum of Solace. Craig was injured twice - first his face was cut and required eight stitches and then was rushed to hospital slicing off the tip of one of his fingers in an action sequence.

Plus two stunt men were hurt in separate car accidents while filming in northern Italy in April.

Hardly surprising given the number of dangerous stunts and explosions in the film, including car and boat chases, plane wrecks and five star hotels being burned to the ground. There is barely time to catch your breath in between some sequences, which leap from one location to the next - blink and you might miss a crucial piece of the jigsaw.

Under the direction of Marc Forster, the film opens with a thrilling Bourne Ultimatum-style roof top chase during the Palio horse race in Siena.

Bond and M (Dame Judi Dench) interrogate Mr White (Jesper Chisternsen), who reveals the organisation which blackmailed Vesper is bigger than he thinks.

Bond’s search for the truth leads him straight to Dominic Greene (French actor Mathieu Amalric), a billionaire environmentalist and the villain of the piece whose green credentials are a mask for his evil plan to control a vital natural resource of an entire continent. And thereafter, enter sexy new Bond girls Camille (Olga Kurylenko) and MI6 agent Fields (Gemma Arterton).

Despite the love scenes and murder, Bond has always been a family-friendly franchise. But not this one. Given the level of violence, it is not really the kind of film you would take the kids to see.

It is Bourne without the depth. And while it keeps you on the edge of your seats, at the end of the day, it is nothing more than a sequel - albeit compelling and gritty.

This latest offering is not as groundbreaking as the 2006 prequel. Living up to success of Casino Royale was always going to be a tall order.

Vindication for THE BOURNE MIMICRY being mocked as an irrelevant title. Eon should be ashamed that most reviews compare THEIR film to another's in terms of tone/action/violence/content. Let the search begin!

[bjmdds]

Yes......i've read some of the early reviews.........and am a little dissapointed, though some were very good.

The general picture i 've got so far is that the film isn't as highly rated as CR, a bit too muddled story wise, in that there are confusing leaps in the story and geography.

Positive points have been Craigs and Dench's performance the actresses and the amazing action scenes.

Its early days yet, and i'll give you all my own review when i see the film on the 31st.

.........i get the impression that QOS is to CR what TND was to GE.

Whatever, with the huge commercial build up to the film, it should be a very big hit!!

AB

Arthur, stick a fork in the Craig experiment....he's DONE!...

[English Agent]

What confuses me a bit is why Forster was picked as director to add a bit of depth to the Bond franchise....when at the end he's just ended up making a big action film?......alledgely

AB

[bjmdds]

What confuses me a bit is why Forster was picked as director to add a bit of depth to the Bond franchise....when at the end he's just ended up making a big action film?......alledgely

AB

We stated that excellent point day one. Eon did not know this? Their arrogance will lead to a commercial flop here, at a $235 million budget.

[Kristatos]

I hate to piss on your chips BJ, but negative reviews don't necessarily make a film a flop. The second Pirates of the Caribbean movie was slated by the critics, yet it still made more than a billion dollars worldwide. Wait till the box office returns come in before you start dancing on Craig's metaphorical grave.

[bjmdds]

A 3 out of possible 5 kinda says it all, IMO.And the Bourne-ishness of QOS is confirmed.

A toast sweet one We were vindicated. The POS/TBM/QOS experiment has failed! It will NOT surpass CR. It will NOT be a hit. Craig could be done as Bond

Of course the pro-Craigs are trying to gloss over the fact that a lot of the reviews that are coming out are less than glowing

Giddy with joy MP? We all stuck to our guns and were proven correct. When the majority of the advanced press is negatively toned, that spells box office doom, ala the 1989 fiasco LTK. The same thing happened.

[Kristatos]

Of course the pro-Craigs are trying to gloss over the fact that a lot of the reviews that are coming out are less than glowing
Giddy with joy MP? We all stuck to our guns and were proven correct. When the majority of the advanced press is negatively toned, that spells box office doom, ala the 1989 fiasco LTK. The same thing happened.

As I recall, LTK had great reviews and a crap marketing campaign - the very opposite of the situation here.

[English Agent]

As stated by 'Variety' the start of QOS's cinema run in the UK, should set the tone for others countries to follow.

Its been a quiet time lately at the multiplexes here, and with no Harry Pothead before xmas, Bond seems to be the only major attraction now. Craig seems to be on a lot of magazine covers here at the moment! Is this also true in the US, or is it a bit early yet.
Bond is also the feature on a few TV programmes as well in the next 2 weeks.

AB

[English Agent]

Of course the pro-Craigs are trying to gloss over the fact that a lot of the reviews that are coming out are less than glowing
Giddy with joy MP? We all stuck to our guns and were proven correct. When the majority of the advanced press is negatively toned, that spells box office doom, ala the 1989 fiasco LTK. The same thing happened.

As I recall, LTK had great reviews and a crap marketing campaign - the very opposite of the situation here.

Just one thing chaps...........its only 1 or 2 reviews which have been negative...........others have been positve!!!

[FormerBondFan]

The second Pirates of the Caribbean movie was slated by the critics, yet it still made more than a billion dollars worldwide.

We got the same thing with the first Star Wars prequel, which got mixed reviews yet still manage to make over $900 million.

[bjmdds]

Of course the pro-Craigs are trying to gloss over the fact that a lot of the reviews that are coming out are less than glowing
Giddy with joy MP? We all stuck to our guns and were proven correct. When the majority of the advanced press is negatively toned, that spells box office doom, ala the 1989 fiasco LTK. The same thing happened.

As I recall, LTK had great reviews and a crap marketing campaign - the very opposite of the situation here.

Not so Kris. I remember it well. Reviews panned LTK as a foreign type of Bond film where he quits the royal government and goes out on a personal vendetta. It tanked badly in the USA. Deja-vu all over again with TBM. Even with minimal competition, how many times will a person see a film they do not care for?

[katied]

I hate to piss on your chips BJ, but negative reviews don't necessarily make a film a flop. The second Pirates of the Caribbean movie was slated by the critics, yet it still made more than a billion dollars worldwide. Wait till the box office returns come in before you start dancing on Craig's metaphorical grave.

Yes, but the public DOES read reviews of movies...if I read more than one review of QOS that was less than glowing, it would make me want to avoid it.Just sayin'. The people who like their Bond dumbed down, the deluded masses, will love it, though

[Kristatos]

Not so Kris. I remember it well. Reviews panned LTK as a foreign type of Bond film where he quits the royal government and goes out on a personal vendetta. It tanked badly in the USA. Deja-vu all over again with TBM. Even with minimal competition, how many times will a person see a film they do not care for?

It got 71% on Rotten Tomatoes - 22 good reviews to 9 bad ones, though RT isn't as comprehensive for older movies as it is for current ones.

[bjmdds]

Not so Kris. I remember it well. Reviews panned LTK as a foreign type of Bond film where he quits the royal government and goes out on a personal vendetta. It tanked badly in the USA. Deja-vu all over again with TBM. Even with minimal competition, how many times will a person see a film they do not care for?

It got 71% on Rotten Tomatoes - 22 good reviews to 9 bad ones, though RT isn't as comprehensive for older movies as it is for current ones.

I am talking about NYC movie critics on television, not the blogs out there, which may not have even been an issue of notice in 1989 with computers.

[stockslivevan]

Hey, if it turns out to be like LTK, NO COMPLAINTS FROM ME! Of course BJ, I know you're also not a fan of LTK and Dalton, so I can see why you're quick to mesh QOS with it. But like what EON did with Moore when TMWTGG tanked, they kept Dalton (until he resigned of course) so they will keep Craig. That's what's always happened with Bond, the direction of the films change but most of the time they keep their actors. Roger Moore was asked back for FYEO, despite his last four being relatively silly OTT camp. If QOS does badly perhaps EON will go with a lighter direction although I've always suspected that they're planning to do that after the whole thing with Bond avenging Vesper storyline is resolved. After QOS taking on a dark page for Bond, naturally they should give him a break with a relief film, perhaps with Moneypenny returning as a symbol for the lighthearted direction. But we have no idea what's going on for Bond 23 so that's a whole different beast.

Tank or bank, I just hope QOS turns out to be a good flick.

[katied]

Tank or bank, I just hope QOS turns out to be a good flick.

Of course you do

[stockslivevan]

Tank or bank, I just hope QOS turns out to be a good flick.

Of course you do

Yeah, so? Is it wrong to hope for a film to be good?

[katied]

The first reviews aren't postive.Just as the anti- Craigs suspected .The pro-Craigs are trying to act like the negative reviews were never written and are putting a positive spin on them.

[stockslivevan]

The first reviews aren't postive.Just as the anti- Craigs suspected .The pro-Craigs are trying to act like the negative reviews were never written and are putting a positive spin on them.

There were good reviews too (which the anti-Craigs are trying to act like they don't exist). Overall, I want to watch the film and judge it myself, I'm not gonna blindly follow someone else's opinion.