What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
135 Comments
- replikhant, on 11/17/2008, -1/+57People have flocked to see QOS because Casino Royale was exceptionally good. I wonder if they will flock to see the next James Bond flick.
- natemac42, on 11/17/2008, -1/+42Ok I'm not trying to write a movie review here, but...
What happened to the classic Bond stuff? Quantum of Solace: no car, no gadgets, he didn't sleep with the bond girl, and they never played the legendary theme song (like casino royale, they waited till the credits).
Oh, and the villain is an environmentalist named Mr. Green, ooooooh - joechapada, on 11/17/2008, -1/+33I think that was his point.
- wowsah156, on 11/17/2008, -2/+28In spite of it being a terribly written and especially terribly edited (felt rushed and unfinished) Bond will always make money. QoS was shockingly rubbish though.
- encosion, on 11/17/2008, -6/+30Exactly... QOS was tripe in comparison to it's predeccesor...
- MrFurious2k, on 11/17/2008, -3/+25I saw it and:
1) They didn't have the new Star Trek trailer in front of it. That pissed me off from the start.
2) I hadn't seen the previous Bond flick, so I was a bit lost from references to the previous movie.
3) The plot was a bit weak... almost as if it was just there to provide a bridge to the next special effect.
4) If I ever build a hotel that runs on Hydrogen fuel cells (in the middle of the desert no less), I'm going to make sure to keep explosive canisters of H2 interspersed all throughout the living quarters and ensure that their design is such that a single explosion will cause a chain reaction bringing down the hotel. Yes, apparently Hydrogen Fuel cell technology has not advanced since the Hindenburg and engineers think its a great idea to generate energy in the living quarters.
5. The boobs were limited and there were no crafty names for anyone. Mr. Green? Lame. I want my Pussy Galore.
3 out of 5 stars. - Frost9999, on 11/17/2008, -0/+22There's a double meaning in "Quantum of Solace". Quantum being a small moment or amount of something, and solace being a synonym for consolation. That fits with the theme of revenge in the film... just getting a small moment of consolation at the time you exact revenge on someone. Why is the media so confused about that? It seemed obvious to me.
I think Quantum was also the name of the organisation or project that the baddies were involved with. - louiebaur, on 11/17/2008, -1/+19With totally beefed up marketing efforts, it's no wonder they set a franchise record.
- lazyleo, on 11/17/2008, -3/+21Casino Royale was amazing QOS ummm you all know how that stint went..
- tghd, on 11/17/2008, -0/+15Your in for a big disappointment!
- PolarBearFire, on 11/17/2008, -2/+16I just watched the movie, great action. Put a gun to my head, but I couldn't tell you what the hell quantum of solace was. Definitely a step down storywise from the great Casino Royale.
- Lasereth, on 11/17/2008, -4/+18Sets the highest record because Casino Royale was the best bond movie ever made and we hoped the sequel would be at least above average. It's not.
- DefaultGen, on 11/17/2008, -7/+20Based on that logic, no, because Quantum of Solace wasn't exactly "exceptionally good."
- omnithought, on 11/17/2008, -3/+16Casino Royale was awesome and had me pumped for this movie. What a ***** let down.
- Buavesy, on 11/17/2008, -3/+13I completely agree. I really liked QoS. I think it ended abruptly but I still enjoyed it. People who say the plot is non-sensible, well I have no idea what they are talking about. Makes perfect sense if you interpret the movie as it is, a Sequel. Like you, I could rarely give a rat's ass about the gadgets. Die Another Day killed that entire part of the franchise when it was completely overdone in that movie. If you think about it logically, the movies are modern day. Can't get anymore technologically advance with the amount of gadgets we are already exposed to. The cars, he started off with the DB9, but like CS, the director felt the need to destroy a $150k car in minutes. Yeah, they took out the gadgets, cars, etc; but I think it puts a more authentic twist on how Intelligent Agencies work. We no longer are living in the Cold War Era, Bond has been revitalized with more modern day issues.
- ZakKebron, on 11/17/2008, -2/+12Personally, I was tired of smarmy-pretty boys quipping one-liners and zapping bad guys with 50mW laser cigarette lighters. I understand that those that expect that from Bond movies will be disappointed in Craig and any future productions using the current model, and I can understand that.
I for one welcome our new Bond and his lack of gadgetry and lothario lifestyle.
But Jack White and Alicia Keyes... that's gotta go. - ndk1, on 11/17/2008, -3/+12QoS was a good ride. No it didnt have a tight plot, but I think it served as closure for the Vesper/Bond thing. It was more like an epilogue than a full plot. I can see it launching the reborn franchise with the way this ended - M saying "I'm glad to have my Bond back." I think the next movie will be a nice blend of the dark ruthless Bond and the smooth talking charmer of the past.
From a female perspective, Craig is the hottest Bond ever. Sure the others were handsome in a classy and charming way. But this is a new level of mysterious/sexy/dangerous. whew!! - PrismoFillusion, on 11/17/2008, -1/+10I didn't like the movie...but to be fair: he did sleep with the Bond girl (Fields) and he drove his bondmobile in the beginning of the movie.
- Garofoli, on 11/17/2008, -2/+11It wasn't even that good. Maybe that exposed vag attracted all those people.
- duckley, on 11/17/2008, -0/+9Daniel Craig was very good, but the editting of the film was TERRIBLE. One of the worst I've ever seen for a major picture.
Direction was lax; not surprising since the Director has never done ANY action pictures before.
The action scenes would have been terrific if the camera were not so close, and the editting allowed for even a tiny bit of continuity.
Terrible stuff. - lacronicus, on 11/17/2008, -0/+8By the way, the one girl's name was "strawberry fields" as shown by the end credits. Not quite as awesome as pussy galore, but still entertaining.
- KarthVader, on 11/17/2008, -8/+16I liked QoS. Very different from a traditional Bond flick. The story could've been a little bit more fleshed out, but it was very pertinent to modern times: Corporations that are more powerful than governments headed by people that seem to be good but are really pure evil. Also, I think people don't realize that QoS is a sequel to Casino Royale. Bond is still seeking vengeance over the death of Vesper Lynd, so he's not going to sleep with a lot of Bond girls. As for the gadgets, I don't really miss a lot of them. Any gadget that does more than fire a laser from a watch or a belt that fires a grappling line is too unrealistic and over the top. I'm not going to do a movie review on digg; definitely give QoS a chance.
- spenner, on 11/17/2008, -1/+9It looked like it was gonna be good. But then you watch it and realise it's not as good as it thinks it is. This from a Bond fan. Casino Royal had a decent plot with some good action scenes strung together by some clever dialog. QoS has a none sensical plot stringing together some over the top action sequences with barely any dialog.
And BTW when did Bond turn into a ninja? (excluding the time in you only live twice lol) - mooseofshadows, on 11/17/2008, -3/+10I am well aware that I'm going to be buried for this. I don't care. I think someone needs to say this.
I may be the only person that is happy with where the new Bond series is going. We've thrown out this idea that Bond will have some sort of perfect gadget for every occasion, sleep with a thousand women, and eventually save the world without any actual effort. The reason these movies are no longer exciting to me is because there's no point; it's been done a thousand times by any given action movie. It's tired, it's repetitive, and It needs to be over with.
Now, Quantum of Solace had it's flaws, sure, but it broke Bond down to something that seperates it both from the previous Bond series and from other recent action series (Bourne, etc.) It's about passion. Every time Jason Bourne kills someone, he does it through instinct, but Bond, in QOS, does it because he wants them to die. And you really believe his rage. I can't tell you how good it is to see decent character development in a movie like this.
Yes, the plot is confusing, because neither Bond nor anyone else in the movie really understands what's going on. It's hard to follow because it's hard for them to follow. They're all confused. So are you. It would be boring if you knew everything that was going on.
Honestly, I might have preferred this to casino royale. I'll have to sit down and watch them together sometime before I decide, but I'm definitely feeling like that's the way it's going to happen for me. - nowhereelse, on 11/17/2008, -0/+7All this 'traditional Bond' stuff - gadgets, frequent bedding and quips - is film stuff that detracts from what started as a literary character with a back story. The current franchise, at Craig's insistence, are building the Bond character. The love of his life was killed in Casino Royale (1 hour before the start of QOS). How could it make sense for him to be screwing the next woman he met?
I found QOS dark and unrelentingly gloomy. There was only a Quantum of Solace for Bond. The character is turning out to be flawed, vindictive and a bit too destructive. How could Roger Moore have portrayed a 3-dimensional human being when all he could do was raise an eyebrow?
I loved the Bourne films and I love their influence on Bond. I found anything prior to Casino Royale tedious and predictable and I expect better things in the future. QOS is not as appealing as Casino Royale.The idea of the film was not to glorify Bond but to develop the character and build his story. In that sense it is a total success. - inactive, on 11/17/2008, -3/+10Must also have the HIGHEST viewers of all time. That movie sucks ass compared to royale.
- D0oki3, on 11/17/2008, -2/+9Very disappointing movie. The layout of the plot was a ***** and it made it hard to get into. Casino Royale was prime, though.
- yohnstoppable, on 11/17/2008, -0/+6It felt like it was edited to try and be like Bourne Ultimatum. Especially that car chase in the beginning. A bunch of 1/8 - 1/2 second shaky cammed clips put together in a way in which it is hard to follow.
- korvan504521, on 11/17/2008, -5/+11Because it wasn't a bond movie, it was a Bourne movie with Bond playing Jason Bourne.
Not to say I didn't like it, it just wasn't very Bondish. Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never dies were my favorite recent Bond movies. The two that followed not so much.
Casino Royale and QOS are good movies, they just don't seem to be Bond movies. - roodammy44, on 11/17/2008, -5/+11I agree. Not very good compared to Casino Royale.
At least Pierce Brosnan's movies had a good dose of humour.
I must be the only person in the world who thought Die Another Day was a brilliant movie... - Exzhaton, on 11/17/2008, -0/+6Moviegoers were not "stirred to support "Quantum of Solace" in franchise-record numbers;" they were trying to go see a freakin movie.
- inactive, on 11/17/2008, -2/+8I thought Quantum of Solace was actually better than Casino Royale although I know a lot of people didn't like QOS due to the lack of high-tech gadgetry thus claiming it wasn't a "traditional Bond film" but I think the constant action was worth it.
- johnnysaucepn, on 11/17/2008, -4/+10Because people have realised that the gimmicks actually take away from the film, rather than enhancing them. Are you the sort of person that goes to see a stand-up show just to hear the catchphrases?
- Cyrus042, on 11/17/2008, -0/+5I completely agree. I tend to think that people looking back on many of the Brosnan Bond movies more favorably because of Goldeneye which I admit, I liked. But I've had the benefit of seeing Tomorrow Never Dies, World is Not Enough rather recently, and compared to QoS or Casino Royale it doesn't hold a candle.
I find it funny that people are criticizing QoS or CR for sub-par plot/storyline, but apparently they've forgotten how horrendous some of the characters, plots and dialogue were in the older films.
Many feel that the new Bond movies stray too far from the original formula of Bond and previous movies. But if you look at the scoring on RottenTomatoes, nearly every Brosnan Bond film has done worse than QoS or CR with the exception of Golden Eye. Even with the degree of bad reviews due to the "lack of gimmicks/gadgets, and the films being too serious".
I like the gritty, realistic Bond. I've seen some of Bourne movies and they never appealed to me and to me they feel distinctly different so I don't get the correlation. (both action movies?)
I'm glad to see the Brosnan Bond go, and I love the new direction with Daniel Craig who is by far my favorite Bond. - faskill, on 11/17/2008, -5/+10Don't forget the fact they made a good movie.
- Vectorkov, on 11/17/2008, -3/+8I liked seeing a darker side of Bond.
- Rioracer916, on 11/17/2008, -1/+6Or, the movie was a let down.
You can't honestly tell me the plot wasn't a LITTLE weak. Even for Hollywood's standards. - shawns, on 11/17/2008, -2/+7One of the few movies a year I pay to go see. Sadly, it was better at inducing naps among my friends during the flick than it was at entertaining us
- falstaff, on 11/17/2008, -1/+5That's like hating Nolan's Batman movies because they didn't have the "POW" graphics. CR and QOS have been brilliant, and disliking them purely over "tradition" is a stupid way to judge a movie.
- Krys1987, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3WHAT!? Theres vag? I wasn't even gunna bother going to watch it but i think that just won me over
- inactive, on 11/17/2008, -2/+5I'm not going to click your links. How do I know my laptop won't go all jihad on me and blow itself up? I'm not taking that chance. My porn stash is at stake.
- mikepictor, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3yet most people say empire strikes back is the best SW film.
- nogami, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Just saw Quantum last night - I thought it was pretty good, but I was getting a little tired of the "shakycam" fight scenes. It was actually getting pretty close to annoying - they need to work on their pacing a bit more.
A bit of frantic camera motion always adds some excitement, however the audience needs some normal camera angles without shakycam now and then to reorient themselves.
Doug Liman had it exactly right for the fight scenes in The Bourne Identity. - Frozo, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3For ***** sake: STOP using dollars as the guideline for movie success! # of ticket sales is the only way to fairly compare movies. The movie industry realizes this of course, but if they used ticket sales, they wouldnt be able to say "MOST SUCCESSFUL MOVIE EVER" every 2 months to con your ass into the theater.
- saketome, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3@fahrvergnuugen - but that's what Bond is. And that's the Bond that people have come to know and love for the past 40+ years now on the big screen.
Oh and, I liked Brosnan. Goldeneye was awesome. There i said it, you can go ahead and digg me down now. - BootsElectric, on 11/17/2008, -1/+4Not at all, jesus, I had no Idea people actually liked it that much. Maybe they forgot the ~40 minutes of bloat where essentially nothing happens they called an ending? The overly blatant sony marketing? The most painfully corny torture seens you've ever seen in your life? I haven't seen QOS yet, but if these reviewers are right, I'm worried, Casino Royale was truly awful.
- DivisibleByZero, on 11/17/2008, -1/+4That's probably just because nerds are buying tickets to see the new Star Trek trailer. It's what elevated Cloverfield, as well as a ton of movies back when Star Wars Episode 1 came out...
"A theater near UCLA showing Siege, The (1998/I) took in only about $1000 on Monday night but $13, 000 on Tuesday, when it was shown with the trailer, the NYT said."
http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/1998-11-23#film7 - dagamer34, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2FYI people, first 3 Bond movies are supposed to be a trilogy. He isn't going to ***** the first thing that moves. Plus, Camille wasn't married (at least he stayed in character there).
He also is NOT a complete character even though he's achieved 007 status. We can't just assume he'll become what we've seen in previous Bond movies within 2 hours. That makes no sense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_23#Future - LordoftheLoo, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/quantum_of_solace/ ...
I guess diggers agree with top movie critics (they gave it a 35%) and average movie goers (they gave it a 65%).
So, stfu fanboy -
Show 51 - 100 of 139 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is