Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 4:04 pm
by thibodeaux
Anybody watch this? I didn't care for it.
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 8:58 pm
by TheCatt
No, but I still haven't seen Casino Royale either.
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 9:37 pm
by Malcolm
TheCatt wrote:No, but I still haven't seen Casino Royale either.
Casino Royale is the best Bond film I've seen since the days of Moore & Connery. I heard bad shyte about Quantum of Solace, so it's got a "when I get around to it" rating.
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 9:44 pm
by GORDON
Haven't seen it.
But the new Star Trek is good.
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 10:50 pm
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:Haven't seen it.
But the new Star Trek is good.
Still a lot to answer for. Public execution of Berman would go a long way towards starting to make amends.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:54 am
by Leisher
Besides trying to follow what might be the best Bond film ever, I think it also hurt that this could have been a Jason Bourne film. Throw in global warming (something audiences everywhere are sick of) combined with a very unusual plot, and I see why this didn't get very good reviews.
It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't great. It felt like the film should have been as long as "Casino Royale", but they crammed it into a shorter running time.
It also seemed to be missing vital elements in what makes a Bond film:
-There was no Q, whom they need to work back into the series. Yes, he was over-the-top humor, but that's the point. Tone him down to fit the more serious mood, but get him back in there. Two movies into this re-imagining and I feel like it's Bond and M versus the whole world.
-There were good looking women, but there was no sexiness. You see more of Daniel Craig's skin than either of the two women. They even do an homage to "Goldfinger" that fails because the shot is too far out.
-Compared to the first film, the Bond we get here is angst filled Bond. I realize this is a revenge story, but damn.
My point is that if they make Bond too dark, too serious, and forget the humor and gimmicks (the Q stuff), what sets Bond apart from Bourne other than what country they represent?
The plot here is really confusing, but only because of the logic behind it. It's not confusing in a "this is tough to follow" way, but more in a "Why the hell didn't he just do that at the beginning of the film? And why did they ignore a massive plot point?" sort of way.
There is a plot point that we're introduced to early on in the film that bodes well for nobody, yet it goes largely ignored at the end. I have a feeling that it's probably where the third film will pick up as it seems that we're seeing more of a progression of one story in this new Bond series, ala the Bourne films. And that's fine, but you need to either tell your audience that or conclude your plot point within the film they're currently watching.
I don't know. As a standalone film, there's nothing here that sets this apart from most other action films. It lacks the Bond charm.
However, if this is the middle piece of a three part story, I guess I'd consider it serviceable, but it's no "Empire".
Bond fans should see it, just to see it. Action fans will like a lot of the sequences.
5 out of 10.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:37 am
by Troy
It's definitely hard to watch this movie after Casino Royale.
Actually, it's hard to watch this movie and then NOT want to watch Casino Royale just to remind yourself how good that film was in comparison to Solace.
I didn't hate it, as I love the new bond series in general... but it just wasn't amazing, which sucks, because it could have been.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:55 am
by Leisher
I forgot to mention the main villain's eyes.
What the fuck was he doing with his eyes? He reminded me of Ben from Lost, and it ripped me out of the movie every time he bugged them out like that.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:55 pm
by Troy
That's another problem, he was a very forgettable villain.
I can still picture everything Mr. Bleeding Eye did in the first movie in the reboot.
Edited By Troy on 1249930520
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 5:35 pm
by GORDON
I got tired of the HYBRID/ALTERNATIVE ENERGY crap all through the film. And hey, from what I saw, I don't want to get within 100 feet of a hydrogen powered hotel.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:29 pm
by Leisher
I actually thought they bashed the hydrogen hotel despite the other "green" messages throughout the film.
Remember that one military guy said to the general "What was that?" when he heard that loud sound. The general said it was something to do with the hydrogen cells, and the guy says "They sound unstable."