I just heard another person slag this film off as one of the worst Bonds.
I don't understand the hate.
What is their problem? Don't they like Bond films that feature strong women who don't die or end up sleeping with Bond?
Because it's different simple as that people are still upset it's not like Rodger moores rubbish they think it should be like that. The fact that bond acted more like a cold hearted killer they didnt like even though that was the whole point of the story
shareI've seen people bashing on it because it has a plot that could very well happen in real life, if it didn't already. Usually these same people bash on Roger Moore's silly storylines. I really don't know what kind of Bond movies these folks are looking for.
I am a very big fan of Quantum of Solace, and I understand if someone would complain about the editing - I can figure out just fine what's going on, but I've seen this movie with people who had trouble with the action. The exposition in the first 30 minutes is also a bit rushed. These things don't bother me, but I can understand people who criticize the movie for it. Other than that, it's a fine entry in the Bond canon, not deserving of being considered one of the worst.
I don't get the complaints about the editing, and I'm someone who is very, very critical of Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer/MTV style editing and action choreography.
I felt the editing here was quite classical and stately, in a good way, and much more coherent than some of the action scenes one finds in the highly acclaimed likes of TDK trilogy and Jason Bourne franchise.
Verily I say unto thee...you must be the only person in the world who has a good word to say about the editing in this truly terrible excuse for a film.
shareYou don't know what you're talking about. You know nothing about editing.
shareVerily I say unto thee..the editing in this film is abysmal and many have commented on this FACT. It is quite impossible to see anything in terms of action in this putrid junk because the "chick flick" director had seemingly never seen an action film in his life.Watch some movies from Hong Kong and Indonesia if you want to see state of the art editing of action sequences.
shareEveryone hates this film because it's lousy.
shareLots of reasons...
1. Doesn't feel like a Bond film. I don't mean that he doesn't sleep with one of the women or that he orders beer instead of his martini. Neither of those help, but I don't need either for Bond to be Bond. What I mean is that it's lacking every element and nuance that makes Bond Bond. There is an exception in the opera scene, which reclaims the 007 vibe for a short bout, but mostly the entire vibe of the film is off-kilter. It's a decent action movie (although not great), but it has no sense of what it is. It feels like I'm watching Charles Dickens in pastel colours.
2. The action scenes are terrible. Shaky cam works in a film like Saving Private Ryan where Spielberg is attempting to show the chaos of being in combat. When used for the larger-than-life spy/action film, it's a severe detriment.
3. It seems to be hedging its bets a lot. It keeps a toe in the Bond world, but kinda wants to be Jason Bourne. It has over the top action hero stunt stuff, but also wants to keep the movie grounded in real world issues. Then, when it goes into those issues, it never goes too deep, because that would have plunged the movie into drama - they keep it an action movie. As a result, it's a jack of all trades without being really competent at anything.
4. Overall, I found the film forgettable. As I said before, it's a decent action movie, but it doesn't stand out. Do you remember the Jet Li, Jason Statham film War? Neither do I, and I saw it. Quantum of Solace was so very, very unmemorable.
For me, most of it comes from number one and number four. I'm not saying I'm right, just saying that's why I don't like the movie.
It's still a better movie than "Spectre"!
But then, aside from the opening scene, everything is.