Watched Daniel Craig's second Bond movie (out of a minimum of 4, according to his contract). Craig proved once again he was the right choice for Bond, although I still would've rather had Clive Owen
( Read more... )
From a cinematographic point of view, I was a little disappointed by the seemingly overuse of close-ups. When filming in Venice, they had set up a huge dangling camera rig that allows the camera to freely glide through and over a couple of blocks. However, after all the editing, it did not really show, as the jump cuts and close-ups overpowered the smooth, gliding shots.
As for the story, it seemed like it wasn't so much about Bond seeking revenge as it was about him learning how to deal with it (by meeting Camille). So, in that regards, it was an interesting angle.
But yeah, there is way too much set-up (a lot of it somewhat subtle, no doubt) for the Quantum group for them to throw it away. Q.O.S. introduced a lot more things about the secret organization, but Casino Royale also spent quite a bit of effort working them in.
Besides, a lot of the Bond movies revolve around a villain bent on world domination, so it's not too much of a stretch to see this series of Bond play that story out.
it plays a lot like spectrum in the sean connery films, where every story dealt with a villain involved with spectrum in some way, until finally connery meets the evil dude with the cat.
like i said, if that's the case then i'm fine with what they did in quantum of solace. but i have to reserve that judgement until the third one comes out
speaking of cinematography... is it me or did they seem to make EVERY fight scene a metaphor? chasing the dude was like the horse race, and they kept cutting in and out of scenes. beating up the greene company guys was just like the opera... and they kept cutting in and out of scenes. very annoying
Haha, I think they did that because the opera and horse race were actual events they filmed. So, I mean, I guess they wanted to show the cool things they did on location.
Comments 3
As for the story, it seemed like it wasn't so much about Bond seeking revenge as it was about him learning how to deal with it (by meeting Camille). So, in that regards, it was an interesting angle.
But yeah, there is way too much set-up (a lot of it somewhat subtle, no doubt) for the Quantum group for them to throw it away. Q.O.S. introduced a lot more things about the secret organization, but Casino Royale also spent quite a bit of effort working them in.
Besides, a lot of the Bond movies revolve around a villain bent on world domination, so it's not too much of a stretch to see this series of Bond play that story out.
Reply
like i said, if that's the case then i'm fine with what they did in quantum of solace. but i have to reserve that judgement until the third one comes out
speaking of cinematography... is it me or did they seem to make EVERY fight scene a metaphor? chasing the dude was like the horse race, and they kept cutting in and out of scenes. beating up the greene company guys was just like the opera... and they kept cutting in and out of scenes. very annoying
Reply
But yeah, they cutting was quite excessive.
Reply
Leave a comment