Quantum of Solace - Bond 22

[Rhinox]

are you seriously using the realism card with bond films? the same bond that uses his name in every fucking movie yet the villains are so retarded that they can't seem to see him coming? Just stop- Look I admire you love for the classic bond but if it didn't adapt to what it is now there wouldn't be any more bond films.

[Darunia]

are you seriously using the realism card with bond films? the same bond that uses his name in every fucking movie yet the villains are so retarded that they can't seem to see him coming?

Earlier i believe you were trying to point out that these movies were 100% serious and not to be taken as light entertainment?

there wouldn't be any more bond films.

I can honestly admit i'd be quite glad if they announced tomorow that there wouldn't be another James Bond movie, let the franchise die with a shred of dignity rather than milking it for every last penny it has by churning out some repetative garbage.
Also, a quick hypothetical for you, if the main character's name wasn't James Bond, and it didnt have Judi Dench as M, it had someone else playing the guys chief... Would it still be a good movie AND would it still have sold so many tickets?

[Sepukku]

Ok so if you want to say Bond is a serious set of stories about villains that wana rule the world, explain to me why they send in 1 spy to take down an entire military base in pretty much all bond movies, in real life it wouldnt happen, they would send in an army and sieze control by force. Point out 1 thing in a bond movie that would actually happen in real life if it were a serious threat.

Bond kinda borders on a black ops agent. In the old Bonds, not so much, but in films like CR/QoS, hes kinda rogue and in basically all the movies, hes setting his own plans to accomplish the objective rather than following strict orders from a higher ranking officer/official. He even borders on having no accountability in Die Another Day, where its acknowledged he was given suicide pills and M had no intention to take responsibility for Bond, let alone barter for his freedom while he was imprisoned and tortured in North Korea. This unaccountability on Britain's part is disproven in CR after Bond shot up the embassy in Africa and they demanded Bond's arrest, but he still borders in a grey area between just being an agent/spy/special forces troop and a black ops agent.

This of course would be one reason why one might send Bond to take down a military establishment like 006's base in South America where he was controlling the Goldeneye Satellite from in Goldeneye. Also, while I know of no for-sure existing true Black Ops troops (and thats half the point of them), America does have small special forces groups operating throughout the world in ways similar to black ops groups, particularly for example in South America interfering with the drug trade. If a small squad of Seals gets ambushed in the jungles in South America and 1 gets shot and dies, we'll never hear about it on the news. It might as well not even have happened it'll get so swept under the rug. They're not black ops either, just like Bond, in that they have to adhere to some rules because their nation is accountable for their actions, especially in violation of more severe international rules, like embassy shootings or any bad PR incident like if a special forces group operating in a theater other than Iraq/Afghanistan were to get caught having shot children or something, it would be all over international news despite the mission previously being unknown to the whole world.

I'm not trying to say that Bond is the most believable concept ever, it borders on absurd that one man could survive everything he has in 22 movies, and some of the gadgetry/plot aspects are a little over the edge, but its not as out there as the Bourne series, especially in terms of plot, and its not as 'out there' as some here are claiming.

[Tekki]

BTW Taken with Liam Neeson is better then Bourne and probably equal to, arguably better then both these Bonds. Wait til those come out. I'm going with better then both simply b/c of the story line intentional brutality behind his action. Saw a DVD of this and didn't even relize it wasn't out in the states until I saw a poster for it coming out today.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0936501/

[Rhinox]

I read Taken is already out in europe? If its true anyone have a link?

[Tanthalass]

I read Taken is already out in europe? If its true anyone have a link?

It is, being a French (I believe?) movie. No link atm, will try and dig one out in a minute.

I can honestly admit i'd be quite glad if they announced tomorow that there wouldn't be another James Bond movie, let the franchise die with a shred of dignity rather than milking it for every last penny it has by churning out some repetative garbage.
Also, a quick hypothetical for you, if the main character's name wasn't James Bond, and it didnt have Judi Dench as M, it had someone else playing the guys chief... Would it still be a good movie AND would it still have sold so many tickets?

Haven't gotten chance to see Quantum of Solace yet, but I can't wait to. However, applying the same questions to Casino Royale: No, it probably wouldn't have sold as many tickets, but that doesn't mean it would have been any worse of a movie.

There is nothing dignified about the older Bond movies. The franchise improved with Pierce Brosnan (until Die Another Day), and has only gotten better with Craig. So its missing some of the lame one-liners, the offensive (to many) womanizing, the ridiculous gadgets, and same repetitive aspects found in each movie. Casino Royale was actually a really good movie. The plot kept me entertained more then any other Bond movie previously, and the characterization was dead on.

Saying the new direction for Bond is bad is like saying Christopher Nolan's direction with Batman is bad and we should go back to the Adam West TV show.

[Jefe]

Taken has been out for quite some time, saw it a couple of months ago.

[Rhinox]

Watch Taken 2008 - Online Video DB

found it.

[archibaldcrane]

Did anyone find it strange that there was an obvious Ford Hydrogen Fuel Cell sponsorship of the film (the SUV he's driving at the end in the desert has a clearly product-placed "Hydrogen Fuel Cell" logo on the back) but at the same time they make fuel cells look like the most combustible dangerous fucking things ever?

[Stiker]

Saying the new direction for Bond is bad is like saying Christopher Nolan's direction with Batman is bad and we should go back to the Adam West TV show.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Just like Batman, recent Bond movies had horrible story, retarded villains, and the public rapidly losing interest in seeing the next abomination. And now, just as Batman is following the graphic novel representation of Batman, Bond is following Ian Flemming's representation of Bond. I fail to see how a "back to basics" approach is doing the series a disservice at all. If I want to see a "light" entertainment spy movie, I'll watch Austin Powers.

[Kael]

I love the current way they are portraying bond.

Gadgets were nice and all but it was getting ridiculous. I rather like the more realistic effect they are going for.

Spoiler: show

Damn, Sucked what happened to Fields. She was hot.

Mathis too! Damnit! D: I felt really bad. It was touching seeing him trying to make Bond feel better when he was drinking himself to sleep.

[Dimmauk]

Took the words right out of my mouth. Just like Batman, recent Bond movies had horrible story, retarded villains, and the public rapidly losing interest in seeing the next abomination. And now, just as Batman is following the graphic novel representation of Batman, Bond is following Ian Flemming's representation of Bond. I fail to see how a "back to basics" approach is doing the series a disservice at all. If I want to see a "light" entertainment spy movie, I'll watch Austin Powers.

Adam West was the Best Batman

Roger Moore was the Best 007.

The old movies are just as entertaining as the new ones. I like the new ones better.

[ZarakiKujata]

Did anyone find it strange that there was an obvious Ford Hydrogen Fuel Cell sponsorship of the film (the SUV he's driving at the end in the desert has a clearly product-placed "Hydrogen Fuel Cell" logo on the back) but at the same time they make fuel cells look like the most combustible dangerous fucking things ever?

Ford has been the overall car sponsor since at least Brosnan(every car but his Aston and Brosnan's Beemer is a Ford lol), I think as a whole this movie particularly focused on energy/environment issues; the lengths that the West is willing to go to keep its oil addiction satisfied, clean water, and fuel cells still are pretty dangerous so its understandable they'd go there too

[Xno Kappa]

Took the words right out of my mouth. Just like Batman, recent Bond movies had horrible story, retarded villains, and the public rapidly losing interest in seeing the next abomination. And now, just as Batman is following the graphic novel representation of Batman, Bond is following Ian Flemming's representation of Bond. I fail to see how a "back to basics" approach is doing the series a disservice at all. If I want to see a "light" entertainment spy movie, I'll watch Austin Powers.

Thank you. The ridiculous gadgets and retarded super-villains in the previous bond films were no different then rubber bat nipples. That's why the last two Batman films have been successful, that's why the last two Bond films have been successful. It's going back to the basics and cutting out the cheesy disney-like Hollywood portions.

[Cow_k]

Whoever decided that extreme close ups in actions scenes are a good thing needs to get a kick in the ass. I thought the movie was pretty enjoyable, especially the latter 2/3's, but the first third where it was mostly action scene after action scene where I couldn't hardly tell what was going on and when, all the while getting a headache from constant quick shots of some guys elbow or random breaking glass really pissed me off.

I suppose the idea is that it 'puts you into the action'. I think it's because they can't find a way to make what they're doing look plausible so instead we only get quick glances. Casino Royale was great with the action scenes, but this movie really sucked with them in my opinion. Though it has been awhile since I saw Casino Royale, maybe I just didn't notice it back then, but right now I need an aspirin.