CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Quantum of Solace
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Quantum of Solace

post #1 of 12
10/30/11 at 11:14am
Thread Starter 

As someone who was involved in shooting Quantum (as an extra) i'm continously frustrated by the missed opportunities in this.

The film had starting dates set, so it needed a script, which was punched out and then rewritten in a haste after Forster became the director. Apparently Haggis finished his rewrite only hours before the writer's strike began.

Before the film came out Forster mentioned in several interviews that he had much less time to edit this film than on his other films. And it shows. The film has beautiful images (the first shots of the film leading up to the car chase for example). But these images are edited very crappily. An obvious example is the infamous "crotch shot" of the maid that Medrano is trying to rape. There are other parts that are edited like crap. For example:

 

How exactly does Bond get rid of the last boat in the Boat chase? Seriously, someone has to explain that to me, because the scene makes no sense!

 

What's up with that split-second shot of Mathis' girlfriend at the end of the scene at Mathis' house?

 

Another example is the use of cool graphics (the computer table for example) but the graphic animation and the sequence itself are so fast that you either don't get the dialogue, cause you're watching the graphics or you try to follow the dialogue and miss that the table apparently scans the money, tracks it, etc.

 

And i have no problem with fast editing if it's done well. I like the Bournes for example.

 

The story isn't bad but it is presented in the most uninvolving way possible. The Story doesn't develop - stuff is found out, then more stuff. then it ends. (i have the same problem with Deus Ex Human Revolution)

 

So in my opinion after Casino Royale this was a step back in almost every regard except the camerawork.

Reply
post #2 of 12
10/30/11 at 11:57am

I agree on all counts. There's some beautiful, gorgeous photography in this... but the rapid fire editing ensured that we didn't get to see much of it.

 

There are some great action sequences (the Sienna rooftop chase), some good performances (Craig and Dench), and David Arnold's score is actually one of my favorites in the whole series.

 

But other than that, all of the faults you mentioned really torpedo the film. To add to the fire, I'll add the poorly-directed performances of Mathieu Almaric and Olga Kurylenko, both of him routinely deliver lines awkwardly. The scene where they first meet up on the waterfront is particularly bad, as Almaric is introduced as an exposition-spouting, terribly uninteresting villain.

Reply
post #3 of 12
10/30/11 at 12:07pm
Thread Starter 

The Sienna chase - especially the end on the scaffolding is a cool action sequence.

Almaric seems to be pissed off that he has to act in a commercial film.

Kurylenko looks like she didn't get one line of direction from Forster.

 

All this is frustrating, but the ending of the boat chase really makes me furious.

Reply
post #4 of 12
10/30/11 at 2:20pm

Let's hope Sam Mendes does a much better job and doesn't deliver such a cluncky, awkward film.

Reply
post #5 of 12
10/30/11 at 2:32pm
I have to say that I only watched this for the first time a month ago and to be honest I liked it. By saying this, I do not mean I think the film is perfect. It is just that it wasn't the train-wreck reviewers and people on these forums led me to think it was.

The film did drastically leave the realism that Casino Royal brought to the franchise, but the action set pieces weren't more unbelievable than past bond films. Though I agree the editing needed work in the action scenes.

Overall the film delivered the popcorn action entertainment I was in the mood for and I'm mystified by all the hate.
Reply
post #6 of 12
10/31/11 at 12:58pm
Thread Starter 

It isn't the believability of the action scenes (except the above mentioned ending of the boat chase; seriously, explain to me how Bond gets rid of the last boat) that i'm criticising.

 

It's about the flow/ pace of the film as a whole and it's action scenes that feels off for many people. If a multi-million dollar project feels like some beginner put it together then people are baffled. I don't hate the film, but it's oddly fascinating because i'm asking myself how and why this can happen.

 

 

Reply
post #7 of 12
10/31/11 at 1:13pm

Marc Forster has always sucked?

 

Not a complex riddle, really.

Reply
post #8 of 12
10/31/11 at 2:25pm
Thread Starter 

i never was a fan, but his films before that didn't have these problems.

 

my theory is that the shooting schedule, the short editing time and the fact that this film was apparently rewritten on the fly overwhelmed Forster. He looked slightly distressed in Austria. Because you would try to hide this, he probably was distressed A LOT.

Reply
post #9 of 12
10/31/11 at 8:03pm

I've recently posted about this at length at the BEST OF BOND thread, but just wanted to state that while I agree with many of your criticisms, I believe the editing and construction of the car chase was some seriously next level kinetic action. I think it was brilliantly shot, and stands as one of the most memorable car sequences I've seen in years

 

 

The only editing criticism I have with the scene is the one I laid out in a post from the MOVIE STUFF YOU ONLY JUST REALIED THREAD (reposted here for clarity):

 

 

Quote:

It is utterly beyond my powers of perception to determine if this guy:

is evil or not



Now, I'm not one of those naysayers fond of disparaging the much maligned QOS car chase. I actually love it. The first time I saw it I was intrigued by it, but wasn't in the right state of mind to actually follow what I was seeing and understand the flow of the action. The second time I saw it with a friend, I was kind of spaced out and the intense, almost impressionistic cutting of the scene totally worked for me. I was awed by Bond's driving prowess and his ability to keep his cool in the midst of such an unpredictable string of highly kinetic events. With that said, there is one thing that I've never been clear on. One action beat that I can't make heads or tails of, no matter how many times I've seen the movie or watched the sequence in slow motion. The evil(?) spike attack truck

Bond appears to be deliberately cornered by his pursuers, only to be smashed into an 18 wheeler. A huge spear like jagged piece of metal shoots out of the side of the truck. At which point the driver sneers and appears to deliberately ram Bond and impale his car. Bond escapes only by spinning his Aston Martin and ripping off it's door




Is the truck driver evil? The spike kind of looks like an accidental deformation of the truck from it's impact with the wall of the tunnel after Bond first hits him.. but the protruding metal is so large as to make me wonder how it could have exploded out of the truck without the entire truck being smashed. Then the driver of the truck seemingly deliberately attacks Bond in coordination with Mr White's henchmen

I think this is just poor editing or a weird shot choice for the Truck Driver's reaction or something. I can't figure out why the truck driver would be evil (unless he was undercover and deliberately deployed in that tunnel), but all the same... that face!

This has long vexed me and enough is enough. I'd like to know what's going on with that guy. No longer am I content to watch QOS and in baffled puzzlement try and ignore that 10 seconds of film in order to focus on the over all chase taking place. If anyone has the answer, I'd appreciate a heads up
 

 

Reply
post #10 of 12
10/31/11 at 11:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Pretzel View Post

It isn't the believability of the action scenes (except the above mentioned ending of the boat chase; seriously, explain to me how Bond gets rid of the last boat) that i'm criticising.

It's about the flow/ pace of the film as a whole and it's action scenes that feels off for many people. If a multi-million dollar project feels like some beginner put it together then people are baffled. I don't hate the film, but it's oddly fascinating because i'm asking myself how and why this can happen.

By and large I didn't notice that at all. Funny though, I'm normally the first one to complain about bad editing in a film ( I just recently watched the directors cut of Dark City and had to turn it off because the pacing was killing all appreciation I had for that film, there was no room left for the characters to breathe). Maybe I'll watch Solace again, but I didn't find much to object to on first viewing other than it wasn't on the level of Casino Royale.
Reply
post #11 of 12
11/1/11 at 2:52am
Thread Starter 

Kate, i just rewatched the scene:

 

The truck driver is not evil. (I'll explain that in a minute)  I never thought that he was, but you asking shows why people are criticising this film: It isn't told competently. At least not in some parts. Other examples are the ending of the boat chase which MAKES NO SENSE! and the end of the scene at Mathis' House in Italy. The two last shots of that scene are just jarring. Oh, and the infamous "crotch shot" of the girl Medrano is trying to rape.

 

The truck driver is not evil, because the shots in the scene are:

-Bond reaches the end of a line of cars and swerves left into the oncoming lane...

-evil henchmen shoot at Bond and his surroundings...

-followed by a VERY SHORT(under 6 frames i think) shot of one of the henchmen shooting...

-another VERY SHORT shot of a truck tire being hit...

-the truck swerves left, crashes into the wall...

-Bond's car brakes, because the left line is blocked...

-two(?) shots of the truck driver as the truck hits the wall...

-Bond swerves right...

-the truck driver STEERS LEFT (why?)

-the truck hits the wall AGAIN with its left side and the "spike" gets pushed out on the right side of the bumper.

 

Then the truck hits Bonds car with its right side(and the spike) as Bond tries to rush past and the truck driver swerves right, away from the wall.

 

I only realized all this now because i rewatched that part about fifteen times.

 

BTW: Does anyone else think, the truck driver looks like Ed O'Neill?

 

Sleeplesslumber:

It's fine if the film worked for you. But maybe what i just wrote illustrates why other people have a problem with the film.


Edited by Mr Pretzel - 11/1/11 at 11:07am
Reply
post #12 of 12
11/2/11 at 3:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Pretzel View Post

Kate, i just rewatched the scene:

 

The truck driver is not evil. (I'll explain that in a minute)  I never thought that he was, but you asking shows why people are criticising this film: It isn't told competently. At least not in some parts. Other examples are the ending of the boat chase which MAKES NO SENSE! and the end of the scene at Mathis' House in Italy. The two last shots of that scene are just jarring. Oh, and the infamous "crotch shot" of the girl Medrano is trying to rape.

 

The truck driver is not evil, because the shots in the scene are:

-Bond reaches the end of a line of cars and swerves left into the oncoming lane...

-evil henchmen shoot at Bond and his surroundings...

-followed by a VERY SHORT(under 6 frames i think) shot of one of the henchmen shooting...

-another VERY SHORT shot of a truck tire being hit...

-the truck swerves left, crashes into the wall...

-Bond's car brakes, because the left line is blocked...

-two(?) shots of the truck driver as the truck hits the wall...

-Bond swerves right...

-the truck driver STEERS LEFT (why?)

-the truck hits the wall AGAIN with its left side and the "spike" gets pushed out on the right side of the bumper.

 

Then the truck hits Bonds car with its right side(and the spike) as Bond tries to rush past and the truck driver swerves right, away from the wall.

 

I only realized all this now because i rewatched that part about fifteen times.

 

BTW: Does anyone else think, the truck driver looks like Ed O'Neill?

 

Sleeplesslumber:

It's fine if the film worked for you. But maybe what i just wrote illustrates why other people have a problem with the film.


I don't really think it's an editing problem, so much as a problem of the extra, how he was directed on set, and the take that was chosen for that particular shot. I understand the sequence of events perfectly, the only problem I have is the way the driver appears to deliberately wrench the truck to the right with an angry looking sneer on his face, as if he were deliberately slamming into Bond

 

He needed more of a "I can't control my truck oh nooooo!" look in order to cut down on confusion

 

Other than that I think the scene is elegantly constructed

 

The last shots at Mathis' house kind of made me wonder at first, but I've come to appreciate them, I feel the camera lingers on his friend because she knows he's going out on another mission, after he'd promised to retire. No big problem with the supposed "crotch shot" either

 

The only editing complaint I have with the film is the impressionistic cutting in the Sienna opera house, you needed about five more seconds of connective tissue with some of those bits, especially when Bond confronts Green's hench men in the hall and they begin fighting or something. I blame that on Foster trying to go arty and ending up confusing. I like the way the sound was dropped and the way the shoot out was intercut with the opera, but it was too choppy on the whole

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Quantum of Solace