Quantum of Solace

Discussion in 'Films, Music and All Things Artsy' started by CityBanker, Oct 31, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. For those of us who haven't seen it yet, I won't spoil it but suffice to say that the one-word key to this film is darkness. And it certainly gets five-out-of-five stars :)

    Bond in the form of Daniel Craig is super-dark in this one. For those of us who thought that Bond was dark in Casino Royale, that was comparably speaking a pink-n-fluffy 007 compared to this one.

    The action starts in Italy and darts between Italy, London, the Caribbean, Austria, Bolivia and Russia (I'm sure there were others - it's quite fast moving) and has Bond doing his normal Bond-schtick.

    There are two Bond girls in this one, the uber-hot Gemma Arterton and the uber-uber-UBER-hot Olga Kuryenko. Go Google 'em. They're HOT. No Q, but then as intimated above, there's very little comedy space in this one.



    In the interests of precis - go see it. Soon. It's good.
  2. Seen a few reviews but yet to see the movie. Suppost to be so dark it makes Bond crap. I like the looks of it, will be seeing it soon hopefully.
  3. Extra dark? Does that mean that Craig pouts more? Pout = dark, is that right? Only dumbass chicks pout..... and 007.
  4. It wasn't Russia! It was Montgomery Lines in Aldershot. We used to live in Communist Blocks!
  5. Damn, I thought I recognised it - I thought it looked like Ice Station Catterick tbh ;)
  6. Thats good to hear its taking it back to how Ian Fleming meant Bond to be.

    Although I like the Bond series, I think its only out of tradition. The later Bond films have pretty much been an hour and a half advert for the various companys that buy into the 'brand'. Story lines; predictable, plot; obvious, scripts; written by kids. Casino Royale went back to what Bond should be about; a spy thriller.

    Looking forward to Quantum of Solace.
  7. Regrettably, there's an obscene amount of product placement in this one too, together with the longest set of pre-film advertising I've ever seen.
  8. Thoroughly enjoyed the film this morning. Went to a 10am showing, as me and the missus were up and about. I much prefer the Daniel Craig 'Bond' to Brosnan. This and the last one are much more 'real' than previous ones with satellite death rays and what not. Looking forward to the inevitable follow-on.
  9. I think the movie is unremarkble. Yes Bond is more ruthless here and dispenses violence with practised ease, but that in itself isn't enough to save the movie.

    The plot is abysmal and seemed to have been stitched together willy nilly. The action sequences was, imo, badly filmed. The director has gone for Jason Bourne editing but it has been taken too far. I couldn't really tell what was happening in the action sequences. All the director has done is to shake the camera about, edit it so you couldn't see what was happening, then film the aftermath properly.

    All in all, I think this is a disappointing film.
  10. I agree with most of that. I liked the end bit though where the girl he usually ends up taking to bed actually gets shot and dies in his arms, looks into Bond's eyes and says with her last breath, "I fcuked your mum". Great twist that.
  11. An interesting fact about the first Bond film (Dr No) was that Lord Lucan was auditioned for the part before Connery.
    Ian Fleming actually preferred Lucan to Connery, whose face, he once remarked, reminded him of a 'Glaswegian lorry driver'.
    It was rumoured to be a lucky win, by Lucan, over Cubby Broccoli in the Clermont Club that made him choose Connery for the role.

    How the history of Bond could have been dfferent over the turn of a card.
    Fleming was also a member of the Clermont club and used to advise David Sterling (Another member) as he tried to prepare a private army to take on the miners' strike of '73 and overthrow the government. 8O
  12. I thought it was crap, saw it last night, too dark, not Bond at all, just a load of action scenes strung together to make up a film, very very disappointing, Daniel Craig played the part well but it wasnt a Bond film in the true sense of the word. 1 out of 5 stars at a push!
  13. So as to give some perspective for those that are yet to see it, what did you think to 'Casino royale'?
  14. I have to agree with the editing. The opening scenes were hard to focus on. It was a nightmare to follow at times and for me just understanding some of the dialogue was hard, although that could have just been the cinema I was in rather than the film. The story was quite pants if Im honest. Will need to see it again at a later date I think even if it is just for seeing Daniel Craig again! :twisted:
  15. Just out of the flicks after catching the 10:10 showing complete with some little kid crying out for his Mum for the first 30 mins.

    Bloody good film!!!!!!!!

    The Bond Girl is hot as hell!!!