People need to keep in mind this films production was screwed up by the whole writers strike that happened when the film was being made, stunt scenes were chucked in to make up for the lack of having a real writer for the film. Craig has even admitted he wrote several scenes with the director. Skyfall will be much better.
This is just a crappy action flick; no gadgets, no evil masterminds, no evil henchmen, no weapons of mass destruction, no witty jokes, no gadgets, no Q, no "near death situation" etc
what the fuck was the meaning of the politically correct ending of this movie? Its so out of character. I mean bond has no problem with killing an unarmed guy in casino royale, a man who dosent mean annything to him personally its just a job. But in this movie he finds the man who made vesper kill here self and he lets him go???? What the fuck is up with that. Casino royale was ment to show why bond is so cold as he is, but this crappy movie destroyed that.
@Redgrant80 yeah exactly he"s moving on, lets live and let live right? NO the real bond Lives and let die, he would have killed that man. And if Bond found resolution in this movie than why would he continue beeing such a cold man. Of course it's not sure bond will continue with being the character we all love, maybe he will turn all soft and PC.
@heavytom89 It doesn't mean he's soft though. It means he stopped mourning her death. THIS is where he becomes the Bond we love. He realizes that people close to him are going to die and that's part of the job. If MI6 wanted Yusef killed Bond would have killed him just like he did to the traitor in Casino Royale. Besides, he isn't getting off easy as MI6 still doesn't know who runs Quantum so they're gonna get that out of him one way or another...
@heavytom89 It's Bond's "redemption" for the rampage he's been on during the movie. It's likely that he wanted to kill him, but he's learned to control himself and that leads are more useful alive, for interrogation (see Greene).
@heavytom89 this is not the only problem with this film. Making Mathis a good guy really dumbs down casino royale to.This would mean that vesper was working for le chiffre and then WHY would he put here in the middle of the road where bond could have killed here, and another thing why would he even have to torture Bond, why not make vesper get the password out of him as she later did. it makes no sence, what do make sence is that mathis was working for le chiffre and vesper for mr.white.
I loved all the Bond reviews, but I was pretty shocked when he actually got rude and sarcastic to anyone who thought the editing was too fast. Yes, I know where the screen is, and I was facing it... But I after three theatrical viewings, I still couldn't see what was going on. That many cuts per second is just too fast for the eye to even register what is happening. Not to mention the camera angles are just wrong, and things are happening on the wrong sides of the screen.
this is not a bond movie. its a average action movie. if they dont get there act together on the next movie and for god sake bring back the bond theme song, Q, monneypenny and another M who dosent act like bonds mother I will get so pissed off
With this film , while the story itself was OK , the action scenes completely covered it up , so it was hard to follow at times . Don't get me wrong , the film's still good , but I don't think it really feels likea Bond movie.
I've seen this movie nearly a dozen times trying to understand it. I think I have it down, only you're right: You need to have incredible attention to understand this movie. All of the major plot pointed scenes are forgettable as hell and by the time the climax hits, you've forgotten Bond's motives from the previous film and the beginning of this one, because the Bond franchise isn't very popular for stories that arc over several films. Tough luck, but this is my least favorite Bond film.
I really felt something was missing from this film but couldn't quite put my finger on it. I remember coming out of the cinema thinking "its ok but not very satisfying overall". Repeated viewings haven't helped and I'd probably say this is one of my least favourite Bond films. The plot just feels too jumbled, messy and not particularly interesting to me. For the first time in Bond film, I didn't really care that much about what happened.
The bad thing about this movie, apart from the boring Bond girls (Gemma Arterton? gimme a break) it has several plot holes: 1. It was never clear exactly how Greene died and why 2. Why is Mathis a good guy again when he turned out to be working for LeChiffre? 3. What happened with Mr. White? I hope they solve that on Bond 23.
@Mazmorrero2 The great thing about this movie is it gets people to ask questions that are obvious to those of us who pay attention. Greene was shot in the head, because he betrayed Quantum, exactly what Bond was counting on. You'd notice that had you paid attention. Mathis was never a "bad guy", which is why Bond apologized to him for having him arrested. Mr White escaped, that happened in the beginning of the movie.
@NecroVMX I know White escaped, but what happened with him afterwards? In which way Greene betrayed Quantum? Do you mean by spoiling its secrets to Bond? And Mathis almost made Bond get his balls destroyed by LeChiffre. If that isn't a bad guy then I don't know what is.
@Mazmorrero2 once again pay attention. we don't know what happened to mr white other than he most likely returned to quantum, it's not important to the story at all. you answered your own second question and mathis was innocent, that was the entire point of that section.
Not my favourite but much better than the sum of it's parts. Loved the tosca scene especially. When Bond goes all revenge like in LtK it always polarises audiences, it makes them uneasy Bond actually feels.
I really enjoyed your Bond reviews, i listened to them all today. Agree with about 80% of your scores too. Except Tomorow Never Dies, for me it was a 4 or 5 at best. Can i ask you, What was the 3rd film that Maud Adams appeared in? I only saw her in Golden Gun and Octopussy? thanks andy.
Someone who has the same thoughts on this film as I do. This movie has one of the best character development for Bond ever. And also, my friend has not scene Casino Royale, has A.D.D. and could still follow the film no problem and wonders why people say the editing is bad. There is a saying I have heard once:
Just because 1 billion people says it is so does not mean it is right or fact.
@Darthzilla99 Damn straight! Honestly, I thought they might make bond all emo after vepser died, and this movie teased you the whole way, you didn't know what his motivation was until the very last scene, it was great, reminded me more of flemming's novels than anything else.
@NecroVMX I can't argue against anyone liking the action. I expressed why I found your argument on people not liking to be lacking any substance. That was MY point. My opinion on why I didn't like the action was not convince you that the action is bad, it was to show it doesn't (necessarily) have to do with a lack of attention from the viewer. When it comes to the review itself, of course you are perfectly entitled to your own opinion without having to argue against something else.
@PDzero Well, I can tell you that you most certainly were paying attention, and clearly didn't like the scene or scenes for your own reasons, which probably have validity, after all it's your own opinion, but what I was addressing in the vid was the many MANY reviews I've seen from people who just claimed it was impossible to follow what was happening, which I found silly, they could not have been paying attention.
@NecroVMX You did negate opposing opinion the moment you stated that people who disliked the action just need to pay more a attention. That was your argument for why people probably didn't like. You even went as far to say those people are "idiots". You didn't stick to just your own opinion on why you liked it, you also argued against those that didn't.
@PDzero You're missing my point, my point is you came and said "you need to do more than just say "it's good" and i'm telling you, you need to do more than say "it's bad" your reasons basically just boil down to "it's bad because it is"
I'm sorry. Your arguments about the editing during the action scenes being just fine doesn't make sense. The thing is, the editing is just poor. They wanted to go for a typical Bourne-like feel during the action, but the poor choice in camera angles and positions, plus the awkward pacing in editing during these scenes really distracts from the action.
It's not hard to follow, it's hard to be immersed by it...
@PDzero No, it's not hard to follow, but that's what every idiot said when the movie came out. It's also not hard to be immersed by it, nor is the editing bad, but you can go ahead and say that, doesn't make it true.
@NecroVMX Just saying "nah ah" doesn't make it true either. I know stuff like this also comes down to personal preference etc. but just saying it is good by dismissing criticism with nothing more then "you should pay attention" instead of elaborating why there is nothing wrong with the editing is a very poor argument, if you could even call it that. It's surprising, because most of the time you do present good arguments on why you do or do not like a Bond flick, also during the rest of this one.
@PDzero Because it's not an argument, I'm not arguing with anybody, a review reflects an opinion not the negation of another opinion. I felt that if people had such a hard time following it (which WAS the common complaint) then they weren't paying attention, and addressed that briefly, but I had no particular problem with the scene. Keep in mind I could turn to you and say that just saying "it's bad the editing is poor and the camera choices are poor" and I simply disagree.
This was a witty, comprehensive, and well-argued review. One correction, though: Greene and Madrano met on Haiti, but the tract of land Quantum wheedled out of their pet dictator was in Bolivia.
when i saw this film i felt this was gonna be bad considering what people were saying and then when i did watched it i was like huh why are people complaining its better then brosnan bond films thats for sure
i saw this shit in theaters and legit. i fuckin wanted my money back after. this is by far the worst Bond film. the best Bond films are as follows: 1. GoldenEye 2. Tomorrow Never Dies 3. The World is Not Enough . 4. Die Another Day. there you go. the best Bond films
I can't see why people dismiss this Bond film because its a little different from the originals. What does that have to do with this movie being good or bad? This movie has cool action scenes, good plot, and solid characters. To me that makes a good film and Its a good addition to the series.
@Drackkor what. that is my own opinion as stated in the review. The movie was good, that's my own opinion. How the hell do I need to get my own opinions?
Just go fuck yourself, you make no sense and have terrible taste in everything.
Is it true that the next Bond movie will complete a trilogy with Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace and bring Bond to a point similar in development to his initial introduction in the 1960's? I thought the sound dub did make some of the dialogue in the first 20 minutes hard to hear and I stuggled to follow the initial plot exposition between M and Bond. Also the editing is a problem during the action sequences making them frantic but uninvolving. Worst example was the cargo plane set piece.
@dafmurray There's no telling what the next bond movie will do, because as of right now the series is finished until MGM gets their financial woes taken care of.
Take the opening car chase sequence. No build up, no suspence prior to it. Just BANG!! straight in there. Thats kind of the tone of the film from then on.
I think if I were to sum up the film in one word it would be BLAND or MEDIOCRE. Despite the intense action there just isn't a decent story to tie it all together.
Incidently the director of Goldeneye and Casino Royale Martin Campbell said in a recent interview that Bond had "completely lost its way" with QoS. That says something.
The screenplay is undeniably weak. The problem with Quantum of Solace is that the story is actually a fairly simple one but it just feels far too complex. You never really get involved or care about what is going on, and to be honest the supporting characters are just dull. Casino Royale had a sense of pace and a solid plot which followed the novel closely. This time round it just feels like a fairly average action picture with weak characters and a weak story.
I really liked this one because it wrapped the conflict of Casino Royale. Some of the problems I had were that this movie is shorter than the previous one and that the main villain wasn't very menacing. I just can't wait for the sequel, it'll be the first Bond movie I'll get to see in theaters.
The ending is in Bolivia with the military coup and water being sold off to a crooked company. This is loosely based on what really happened in Bolivia in the last ten years or so. Quantum and Casino are my favourites of the series, though there is something to like about all of them.
u cant beat casino royale it was groundbreakin cause it brought the series back to its roots AKA the books as a dark gritty bond) craig, brosnan and connery are the best bonds and each had something to offer connery as the first bond brosnan as the big return of bond and craig as the back to the basics kick ass bond and quantum of solace is the only actual sequel in all bonds and it prob will be the last
the editting wasnt too bad as people claim. daniel craig is easy to spot w/ his blonde hair. for those of you who say this is bourne ripoff, bond movies have always referenced the popular movies of its respective time. ex: the helicopter chase in from russia with love is VERY similar to north by northwest, but its well done. no one seems to ever complain about that. overall, i liked the feel of lean/vengeful feel in quantum of solace
The only editing problem I had was the millisecond Michael Bay cuts with the car chase at the start since it feels so jarring. No problem following the rest of the movie or it's story.
I'm wondering if they do a third movie will it follow more of the Quantum villains and make them the new SPECTRE.
Keeping the same Felix took the fun out of his reveal from earlier movies like Dr. NO, Thunderball and Diamonds are Forever.
I'm mixed on this one. Need to see it again, I've only seen it twice.
Oh...and insulting peoples attention span and ability to look at the screen correctly is not the way to attack it...remember, this is the most COMMON complaint about this movie, its not like 3 people have said this. I'm a fan of these movies, and I know alot about film making and editing. Don't alienate your viewers by insulting them is my advice here.
I really REALLY don't care if 1 or 1000 people "complained" about something stupid, and now I'm going to block you for being a goddamn idiot who didn't know when to stop the first time.
For the first time I have to take issue with something....the editing in the action scenes of this movie certainly was too quick, too tight and too much hand held shakey cam. Dynamic, quick fire editing is one thing...but this was just too much. If it were'nt it would'nt be the most common complaint about the movie. Look at the editing in casino royale's actions scenes by comparison - still very dymanic and exciting...but much easier on the eye and head...and no complaints from anyone.
daniel craigs bond has got a lil bit of every bond in him lik sean connerys swuave and one liners the same with roger moore i havent notice george lezenby but hes deff got a lot of timothy dalton in him like his aggresion e.c.t hes got a bit of brosnan in him too so these new bond movies are great but i hope that they bring in a new Q not john cleese cause he sucks and desmond llewelyn will always be the best Q it would have been great to have in the new bonds beside daniel craig it be funny
Yeah Dalton was Spectacular, To me Sean Connery is my favorite Bond, Dalton should have done at least 2 more during the the 5 year absence of Bond, but Lawsuit kicked in. So Brosnan was Bond Nice reviews!!!
Maybe I'm crazy but I prefer this movie than Casino Royale - more action scenes, great storyline and visual effects. Daniel Craig was fantastic. Olga Kurylenko (Camille) is definitely one of the most beautiful and memorable Bond Girls plus she looked much stronger than weak Vesper in Casino Royale. Mathieu Amalric, Judi Dench, Giancarlo Giannini were great as well. Gemma Arterton looked absolutely useless.
Brilliant movie but the soundtrack was very disappointing
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Wow... you're accusing those who criticize this movie's frenetic editing as having a short attention span? I consider this movie and its ridiculously hyper editing to be catering to such people. Is it too much to ask that the cameraman just step back and let the *actors* do the stuntwork? Like they did in the *good* Bond movies?
Most of your reviews are good, but you are way off on this disappointing mess. It's down there with Man With the Golden Gun at the bottom of the series.
wait, did you say new paper back from aren't those like all the 007 novels but on the cover of all them they just have just the girl on covers of all them and title of the book on the women and girls on the covers have diffrent color skin on the covers are those the new paper back forms of the books with just the girls on them and nothing else
well there are some James Bond books in a paper back forms that just have the bond girls on the cover of all of them and all them have diffrent color skin and they are from peguin books but they are a little cartoonist but they are still really cool I have all of them on my myspace profile in my pictures ablum my favorite bond cover is the Casino Royal cover on the cover of the Casino Royal novel is just Vesper Lynd and she has purple skin and black hair and a black dress
Obviously you have the attention span of a gnat and weren't paying attention. It's almost a shame that they don't chronicle idiocy, as yours speaks volumes.
there is a rumor that ernst stavro blofled will be in bond 23. I think he might be the head of quantum because quantum was obviously used to replace SPECTRE
but man I hope it does I think best actor that would do a great job as Blofled I think would be Robert Carlyle I mean he did a great performance in the world is not enough playing Renard I watched the world is not enough last night and I thought Carlyle would do a damn good job as Blofled I think he's like a strong virson of Blofeld he would do really great job as Blofled if Carlye plays if theres any Blofled actor he reminds you of its Telly Savlas I think
I always think that Craig remains of Roger Moore for some reason but he looks like a younger and tougher virson of Moore but I think Dainel Craig is really good and I think it not his fault it just the people think about QOS to much and think it his worst movie which is not I can't wait for the next movie with Craig it going to great
Well done for all your reviews - you're not always right, but I agree about QOS - it's much better than some have said, just lacks a bit of the charm of previous Bonds...
yeah No! Bourne is naturally a take on the bond films, because they were the first spy film serial. The villian is to represent the dark elemonts of the rich and powerful. The women are both lovely and the main lady female is right on level with bond.
totally agree. Most stupid bond I have ever seen in my life. I have only watched it through once, without pauses, and have not had enough interest to watch again.
I don't know what you mean by editing but the cameras were pretty poor in this film, most would agree. It's just all over the place especially in the PTS car chase
Yes, you are right. Verper Lynd was indeed a pun on West Berlin... The title track for this movie has got to be one of my least favourite Bond themes ever. Too bad Amy Whinehouse was too out of it to complete the project, I'm sure she'd have written a much, much better song.
Yes! I've finally found someone who shares my opinion of this film, I think QoS is a great addition to the Bond legacy, and I thoroughly enjoyed your review, great job. I like the tone of the Craig films, two of my favorites, although i like the classics as well.
These people chose writing as their profession, meaning they write for a living. You can't expect them to give up the rights to their stories and titles without receiving exactly the amount deserved.
clive owen would be goog as bond but theres one obstacle his age being 44 i would start to be optimistic but casting him because you want one that will do it for a long time and theres about a year gap between every film discarding die another day and casino royale but a few years back he would of been perfect i would be egging to star hugh jackman or ewan mcgregor id give henry cavill a few more years so not to be too young but i personally hope they use the other authors titles
thats right they should by the rights from the other authors i dont see wy the authors would refuse it will save them the trouble of thinking there own although i still think they should rserve property of a lady its got an interesting twist to it and a film would be interesting anyway if daniel craig didnt exist who would you personally hav e as bond
I was pretty supportive of Clive Owen when he was being considered. It's not that the authors would refuse, it's that they know that the rights to just the titles alone (much less the stories) would be worth and would want a load of money, EON may not think it's worth it and just come up with their own titles.
Yes, they'd have to come up with their own, or buy the rights from the other authors, though I'm willing to bed the authors would want a LOT of money for the rights.
I doubt they'll use property of a lady, aside from the fact that they tried once already, the film octopussy was already heavily based on that story.
No, there aren't very many more. There's 007 In New York, The Hildebrand Rarity, Risico and The Property Of A Lady. It's likely they'll just start using original titles again.
No, EON films only bought the rights to Ian Flemming's titles and most of his stories (all of them except TSWLM, which is why the movie version was a completely different story.) They do not own the rights to the titles or stories written by any other author, though they've borrowed elements of some of them.
who cares who wrote the book thew pierce brosnan titles werent books until the films were made they should get the rights and make a good film my favourite one is win lose or die i think its classic but hey all have ian flemings own creation 007 and that is whats important
See you're not paying attention. You say "who cares who wrote the book" uh, THEY CAN'T USE THOSE TITLES BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE PROPER RIGHTS TO DO SO.
Yes the brosnan titles were not books...but what you gave me were all titles of books. The two have nothing to do with each other. Please make sense.
but if they go too far they will ruin it they just need to get back on course with a few massivly good bond films and then start experimenting a bit
anyway lets stop argueing a bond film is a bond film lets talk about titles for the next film iv been looking at some of the novels and i think some good titles will be
They don't have the rights to use the titles of Gardner or Benson's books, that's why they never did. Though Devil May Care may be different because it was written under the name Ian Flemming
im not saying it wont work and im not saying it will work but its just hard to imagine looking at 2 bond film title sequences and see the names of the main bond girl twice and the series should grow but in a safe way
worst bond film.
williamQUIQUEREE1 1 week ago
i enjoyed this film, its not one of the best but its got great action. at least they had a good gunbarrel.
filmneek 1 week ago
I personally liked this more then Casino.
JudasAngel666 1 month ago
Q will be in Skyfall!
killerbumble 2 months ago
People need to keep in mind this films production was screwed up by the whole writers strike that happened when the film was being made, stunt scenes were chucked in to make up for the lack of having a real writer for the film. Craig has even admitted he wrote several scenes with the director. Skyfall will be much better.
Chewy2nd 2 months ago
This is just a crappy action flick; no gadgets, no evil masterminds, no evil henchmen, no weapons of mass destruction, no witty jokes, no gadgets, no Q, no "near death situation" etc
spindle12 3 months ago 5
I love Bond films but this one I think was rather awful.
KISSarmyGuy 3 months ago 5
Are you going to be reviewing Skyfall when its released?
aikiliam 3 months ago
This one has the ugliest Bond Girl ever. And the editing IS shit.
BleakVision 5 months ago 32
what the fuck was the meaning of the politically correct ending of this movie? Its so out of character. I mean bond has no problem with killing an unarmed guy in casino royale, a man who dosent mean annything to him personally its just a job. But in this movie he finds the man who made vesper kill here self and he lets him go???? What the fuck is up with that. Casino royale was ment to show why bond is so cold as he is, but this crappy movie destroyed that.
heavytom89 5 months ago 41
@heavytom89 I %100 agree with you.
KISSarmyGuy 4 months ago
@heavytom89 He didn't let him go, he brought him in like he was ordered to. If anything it shows that he's moving on.
Redgrant80 4 months ago
@Redgrant80 yeah exactly he"s moving on, lets live and let live right? NO the real bond Lives and let die, he would have killed that man. And if Bond found resolution in this movie than why would he continue beeing such a cold man. Of course it's not sure bond will continue with being the character we all love, maybe he will turn all soft and PC.
heavytom89 4 months ago
@heavytom89 It doesn't mean he's soft though. It means he stopped mourning her death. THIS is where he becomes the Bond we love. He realizes that people close to him are going to die and that's part of the job. If MI6 wanted Yusef killed Bond would have killed him just like he did to the traitor in Casino Royale. Besides, he isn't getting off easy as MI6 still doesn't know who runs Quantum so they're gonna get that out of him one way or another...
Redgrant80 4 months ago
@heavytom89 It's Bond's "redemption" for the rampage he's been on during the movie. It's likely that he wanted to kill him, but he's learned to control himself and that leads are more useful alive, for interrogation (see Greene).
soldier4670 3 months ago
@heavytom89 this is not the only problem with this film. Making Mathis a good guy really dumbs down casino royale to.This would mean that vesper was working for le chiffre and then WHY would he put here in the middle of the road where bond could have killed here, and another thing why would he even have to torture Bond, why not make vesper get the password out of him as she later did. it makes no sence, what do make sence is that mathis was working for le chiffre and vesper for mr.white.
heavytom89 4 months ago
I loved all the Bond reviews, but I was pretty shocked when he actually got rude and sarcastic to anyone who thought the editing was too fast. Yes, I know where the screen is, and I was facing it... But I after three theatrical viewings, I still couldn't see what was going on. That many cuts per second is just too fast for the eye to even register what is happening. Not to mention the camera angles are just wrong, and things are happening on the wrong sides of the screen.
leitercia 5 months ago 3
Casino Royale got the dark revenge follow up that OHMSS deserved
baldridgeda81 6 months ago
Quantum of Balls
tcvicesquad 7 months ago 3
@tcvicesquad Please don't share your sexual fantasies with me.
NecroVMX 7 months ago 7
Great review.. but the water wasn't under haiti, it was Bolivia.... and I loved QOS..
Don't know why people dislike this film so much.. It's barely a step under Casino but not by much and I sometimes like it better.
lestliness 7 months ago
Excellent job
SkiDaBird 7 months ago
this is not a bond movie. its a average action movie. if they dont get there act together on the next movie and for god sake bring back the bond theme song, Q, monneypenny and another M who dosent act like bonds mother I will get so pissed off
heavytom89 7 months ago
General is trying to take over Bolivia not hati. Only the boat chase scene is in hati.
SirTim123 8 months ago
The only problem I had with the editing was it cut to irrelavant scenes too much.
AlaskaAce1996 9 months ago
quantum is a very average film, disappointing follow-up to casino.
joedenmark99 11 months ago 7
With this film , while the story itself was OK , the action scenes completely covered it up , so it was hard to follow at times . Don't get me wrong , the film's still good , but I don't think it really feels likea Bond movie.
1996BeagleMan 11 months ago
this is just my opinion they' ve rebooted the series get used to it we're not in sean to brosnan years we're in craig years get used to it
RYANarcade 1 year ago 2
@Mazmorrero Lechiffre told bond that mathis was his friend. To shake up bond before torturing him.
atompike 1 year ago
@atompike yep, not only that but bond's assumption never figured that vesper was the traitor
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@NecroVMX thanks for spoiling the movie for me...
keemysoodreamy23 5 months ago
I've seen this movie nearly a dozen times trying to understand it. I think I have it down, only you're right: You need to have incredible attention to understand this movie. All of the major plot pointed scenes are forgettable as hell and by the time the climax hits, you've forgotten Bond's motives from the previous film and the beginning of this one, because the Bond franchise isn't very popular for stories that arc over several films. Tough luck, but this is my least favorite Bond film.
KaptinKilla 1 year ago
I hope Bond 23 is as good as this one!
MegaVergan 1 year ago
I really felt something was missing from this film but couldn't quite put my finger on it. I remember coming out of the cinema thinking "its ok but not very satisfying overall". Repeated viewings haven't helped and I'd probably say this is one of my least favourite Bond films. The plot just feels too jumbled, messy and not particularly interesting to me. For the first time in Bond film, I didn't really care that much about what happened.
mrbain123 1 year ago
The bad thing about this movie, apart from the boring Bond girls (Gemma Arterton? gimme a break) it has several plot holes: 1. It was never clear exactly how Greene died and why 2. Why is Mathis a good guy again when he turned out to be working for LeChiffre? 3. What happened with Mr. White? I hope they solve that on Bond 23.
Mazmorrero2 1 year ago
@Mazmorrero2 The great thing about this movie is it gets people to ask questions that are obvious to those of us who pay attention. Greene was shot in the head, because he betrayed Quantum, exactly what Bond was counting on. You'd notice that had you paid attention. Mathis was never a "bad guy", which is why Bond apologized to him for having him arrested. Mr White escaped, that happened in the beginning of the movie.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@NecroVMX I know White escaped, but what happened with him afterwards? In which way Greene betrayed Quantum? Do you mean by spoiling its secrets to Bond? And Mathis almost made Bond get his balls destroyed by LeChiffre. If that isn't a bad guy then I don't know what is.
Mazmorrero2 1 year ago
@Mazmorrero2 once again pay attention. we don't know what happened to mr white other than he most likely returned to quantum, it's not important to the story at all. you answered your own second question and mathis was innocent, that was the entire point of that section.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@NecroVMX It makes no sense. Mathis is as innocent as OJ Simpson.
Mazmorrero2 1 year ago
@Mazmorrero2 it makes perfect sense because mathis WAS innocent, something you really need to FUCKING PAY ATTENTION to notice.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@Mazmorrero2 1: He either died or posioned himself.
2: Because its obvious that he didnt take completely one side and decide to betray LeChiffre.
3: Who cares, he wasnt THAT important to the plot.
DarPower1 1 year ago
Not my favourite but much better than the sum of it's parts. Loved the tosca scene especially. When Bond goes all revenge like in LtK it always polarises audiences, it makes them uneasy Bond actually feels.
leeboy26 1 year ago
I really enjoyed your Bond reviews, i listened to them all today. Agree with about 80% of your scores too. Except Tomorow Never Dies, for me it was a 4 or 5 at best. Can i ask you, What was the 3rd film that Maud Adams appeared in? I only saw her in Golden Gun and Octopussy? thanks andy.
somebananna 1 year ago
@somebananna She was in A View to a Kill, uncredited. Really nothing more than a cameo
NecroVMX 1 year ago
When the next Bond film is released are you going to review it?
killerbumble 1 year ago
@killerbumble probably
NecroVMX 1 year ago
Someone who has the same thoughts on this film as I do. This movie has one of the best character development for Bond ever. And also, my friend has not scene Casino Royale, has A.D.D. and could still follow the film no problem and wonders why people say the editing is bad. There is a saying I have heard once:
Just because 1 billion people says it is so does not mean it is right or fact.
Darthzilla99 1 year ago
@Darthzilla99 Damn straight! Honestly, I thought they might make bond all emo after vepser died, and this movie teased you the whole way, you didn't know what his motivation was until the very last scene, it was great, reminded me more of flemming's novels than anything else.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@NecroVMX I can't argue against anyone liking the action. I expressed why I found your argument on people not liking to be lacking any substance. That was MY point. My opinion on why I didn't like the action was not convince you that the action is bad, it was to show it doesn't (necessarily) have to do with a lack of attention from the viewer. When it comes to the review itself, of course you are perfectly entitled to your own opinion without having to argue against something else.
PDzero 1 year ago
@PDzero Well, I can tell you that you most certainly were paying attention, and clearly didn't like the scene or scenes for your own reasons, which probably have validity, after all it's your own opinion, but what I was addressing in the vid was the many MANY reviews I've seen from people who just claimed it was impossible to follow what was happening, which I found silly, they could not have been paying attention.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@NecroVMX You did negate opposing opinion the moment you stated that people who disliked the action just need to pay more a attention. That was your argument for why people probably didn't like. You even went as far to say those people are "idiots". You didn't stick to just your own opinion on why you liked it, you also argued against those that didn't.
PDzero 1 year ago
@PDzero You're missing my point, my point is you came and said "you need to do more than just say "it's good" and i'm telling you, you need to do more than say "it's bad" your reasons basically just boil down to "it's bad because it is"
NecroVMX 1 year ago
I'm sorry. Your arguments about the editing during the action scenes being just fine doesn't make sense. The thing is, the editing is just poor. They wanted to go for a typical Bourne-like feel during the action, but the poor choice in camera angles and positions, plus the awkward pacing in editing during these scenes really distracts from the action.
It's not hard to follow, it's hard to be immersed by it...
other than that, good review. :)
PDzero 1 year ago
@PDzero No, it's not hard to follow, but that's what every idiot said when the movie came out. It's also not hard to be immersed by it, nor is the editing bad, but you can go ahead and say that, doesn't make it true.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@NecroVMX Just saying "nah ah" doesn't make it true either. I know stuff like this also comes down to personal preference etc. but just saying it is good by dismissing criticism with nothing more then "you should pay attention" instead of elaborating why there is nothing wrong with the editing is a very poor argument, if you could even call it that. It's surprising, because most of the time you do present good arguments on why you do or do not like a Bond flick, also during the rest of this one.
PDzero 1 year ago
@PDzero Because it's not an argument, I'm not arguing with anybody, a review reflects an opinion not the negation of another opinion. I felt that if people had such a hard time following it (which WAS the common complaint) then they weren't paying attention, and addressed that briefly, but I had no particular problem with the scene. Keep in mind I could turn to you and say that just saying "it's bad the editing is poor and the camera choices are poor" and I simply disagree.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
I love the music!
MegaVergan 1 year ago
This was a witty, comprehensive, and well-argued review. One correction, though: Greene and Madrano met on Haiti, but the tract of land Quantum wheedled out of their pet dictator was in Bolivia.
FreedomZealot 1 year ago
@FreedomZealot Thanks, I realized that after seeing it again, I was like "d'oh!"
Kind of stupid of me really, there's no deserts on haiti!
NecroVMX 1 year ago
Great review!
XJVHS 1 year ago
I respect so much because of the fact the you say Man with the Golden Gun is by far the worst bond film ever
zangetsumizu 1 year ago
I didnt enjoy Quantum just my opinion but I liked your review Necro keep it up
antitroll890 1 year ago
when i saw this film i felt this was gonna be bad considering what people were saying and then when i did watched it i was like huh why are people complaining its better then brosnan bond films thats for sure
SFNDMK 1 year ago
The chasing scenes were badly edited dude
skrew255 1 year ago 4
i saw this shit in theaters and legit. i fuckin wanted my money back after. this is by far the worst Bond film. the best Bond films are as follows: 1. GoldenEye 2. Tomorrow Never Dies 3. The World is Not Enough . 4. Die Another Day. there you go. the best Bond films
XxArkhamxAsylumxX 1 year ago 2
@XxArkhamxAsylumxX dude die another day was awful
SFNDMK 1 year ago
@XxArkhamxAsylumxX thats a really shit list
lloydee1983 1 year ago
this movie sucked, 6/10 at best
connor6665 1 year ago 2
I thought the song for this one kicked ass, but I just couldn't get into the movie. Too much pointless action. It's not Bond.
mjthekingofmusic52 1 year ago
I can't see why people dismiss this Bond film because its a little different from the originals. What does that have to do with this movie being good or bad? This movie has cool action scenes, good plot, and solid characters. To me that makes a good film and Its a good addition to the series.
TheDondajonhon46 1 year ago
HaHa....this thing is called a screeeeeeeeen !! NICE ONE !
GoldenLegends 1 year ago
LOL Epic fail is staying awake during this movie. Wake up and get your own opinions.
Drackkor 1 year ago
@Drackkor what. that is my own opinion as stated in the review. The movie was good, that's my own opinion. How the hell do I need to get my own opinions?
Just go fuck yourself, you make no sense and have terrible taste in everything.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
This movie sucked he could of really gotten a gaget or 2, this movie is the worst one of all the Bond films!
Drackkor 1 year ago
@Drackkor epic fail on your part. Try reading the books
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@Drackkor Gadgets? Mate, Bond, isn't about gadgets. Go watch the pitiful Brosnan films, kid.
Pinesol131 1 year ago
i did the same thing on quantum of solace and devil may care books but only recently bought devil may care
TheDrYes 1 year ago
Is it true that the next Bond movie will complete a trilogy with Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace and bring Bond to a point similar in development to his initial introduction in the 1960's? I thought the sound dub did make some of the dialogue in the first 20 minutes hard to hear and I stuggled to follow the initial plot exposition between M and Bond. Also the editing is a problem during the action sequences making them frantic but uninvolving. Worst example was the cargo plane set piece.
dafmurray 1 year ago
@dafmurray There's no telling what the next bond movie will do, because as of right now the series is finished until MGM gets their financial woes taken care of.
NecroVMX 1 year ago
@NecroVMX could be another 6 year wait.
lloydee1983 1 year ago
Property of a Lady is the next movie because the imdb says Maria Fraudstein
and shes only in Property of a Lady.
TheRiddler210 1 year ago
Btw insulting the audience in such a childish way is NOT how you win respect (even if at times you might be right).
mrbain123 1 year ago
@mrbain123 lol that made me chuckle
lloydee1983 1 year ago
Take the opening car chase sequence. No build up, no suspence prior to it. Just BANG!! straight in there. Thats kind of the tone of the film from then on.
I think if I were to sum up the film in one word it would be BLAND or MEDIOCRE. Despite the intense action there just isn't a decent story to tie it all together.
Incidently the director of Goldeneye and Casino Royale Martin Campbell said in a recent interview that Bond had "completely lost its way" with QoS. That says something.
mrbain123 1 year ago
The screenplay is undeniably weak. The problem with Quantum of Solace is that the story is actually a fairly simple one but it just feels far too complex. You never really get involved or care about what is going on, and to be honest the supporting characters are just dull. Casino Royale had a sense of pace and a solid plot which followed the novel closely. This time round it just feels like a fairly average action picture with weak characters and a weak story.
mrbain123 1 year ago
I really liked this one because it wrapped the conflict of Casino Royale. Some of the problems I had were that this movie is shorter than the previous one and that the main villain wasn't very menacing. I just can't wait for the sequel, it'll be the first Bond movie I'll get to see in theaters.
desotowrong 2 years ago
Comment removed
lilwaynewezzy 2 years ago
i heard a rumor that bond 23 will introduce a new moneypenny and Q
and that blofield will show up in the 23 bond too
lilwaynewezzy 2 years ago
isnt it bolivia?not haiti?it would be pretty stupid if there were a desert on an island.
harrycarlitos91 2 years ago
there are parts in haiti and parts in bolivia
NecroVMX 2 years ago
The ending is in Bolivia with the military coup and water being sold off to a crooked company. This is loosely based on what really happened in Bolivia in the last ten years or so. Quantum and Casino are my favourites of the series, though there is something to like about all of them.
Good reviews, N. Cheers.
Yep147 2 years ago
u cant beat casino royale it was groundbreakin cause it brought the series back to its roots AKA the books as a dark gritty bond) craig, brosnan and connery are the best bonds and each had something to offer connery as the first bond brosnan as the big return of bond and craig as the back to the basics kick ass bond and quantum of solace is the only actual sequel in all bonds and it prob will be the last
lilwaynewezzy 2 years ago
craig sucks
NWAfan 2 years ago
the editting wasnt too bad as people claim. daniel craig is easy to spot w/ his blonde hair. for those of you who say this is bourne ripoff, bond movies have always referenced the popular movies of its respective time. ex: the helicopter chase in from russia with love is VERY similar to north by northwest, but its well done. no one seems to ever complain about that. overall, i liked the feel of lean/vengeful feel in quantum of solace
krnfighter88 2 years ago
The only editing problem I had was the millisecond Michael Bay cuts with the car chase at the start since it feels so jarring. No problem following the rest of the movie or it's story.
I'm wondering if they do a third movie will it follow more of the Quantum villains and make them the new SPECTRE.
Keeping the same Felix took the fun out of his reveal from earlier movies like Dr. NO, Thunderball and Diamonds are Forever.
I'm mixed on this one. Need to see it again, I've only seen it twice.
sserpent21 2 years ago 13
@sserpent21 lets ope tey dont do a diamons ar forever take
conrod15reveiw 5 months ago
The action editing was so nauseating, I just HAD to look away.
EmperorDrax 2 years ago 4
No fucking shit. Movies made from books never having anything to do with the fucking books.
PCGAMEfreak 2 years ago
I'd point out the many, many instances of which that is bullshit. But you already know you're an idiot.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
Oh...and insulting peoples attention span and ability to look at the screen correctly is not the way to attack it...remember, this is the most COMMON complaint about this movie, its not like 3 people have said this. I'm a fan of these movies, and I know alot about film making and editing. Don't alienate your viewers by insulting them is my advice here.
kalsolarUK 2 years ago
And why do I care what other people think.
I really REALLY don't care if 1 or 1000 people "complained" about something stupid, and now I'm going to block you for being a goddamn idiot who didn't know when to stop the first time.
Bye.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
For the first time I have to take issue with something....the editing in the action scenes of this movie certainly was too quick, too tight and too much hand held shakey cam. Dynamic, quick fire editing is one thing...but this was just too much. If it were'nt it would'nt be the most common complaint about the movie. Look at the editing in casino royale's actions scenes by comparison - still very dymanic and exciting...but much easier on the eye and head...and no complaints from anyone.
kalsolarUK 2 years ago 2
Why should I care what complaints other people have?
NecroVMX 2 years ago
this movie's title sequence wasn't that good, especially after casino royale's flawless one
ienjoysleeping 2 years ago
daniel craigs bond has got a lil bit of every bond in him lik sean connerys swuave and one liners the same with roger moore i havent notice george lezenby but hes deff got a lot of timothy dalton in him like his aggresion e.c.t hes got a bit of brosnan in him too so these new bond movies are great but i hope that they bring in a new Q not john cleese cause he sucks and desmond llewelyn will always be the best Q it would have been great to have in the new bonds beside daniel craig it be funny
lilwaynewezzy 2 years ago
really, i saw you as a sean connery fan
ienjoysleeping 2 years ago
who's your favorite actor to play bond?
ienjoysleeping 2 years ago
dalton
NecroVMX 2 years ago
Yeah Dalton was Spectacular, To me Sean Connery is my favorite Bond, Dalton should have done at least 2 more during the the 5 year absence of Bond, but Lawsuit kicked in. So Brosnan was Bond Nice reviews!!!
aberdudeify007 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Maybe I'm crazy but I prefer this movie than Casino Royale - more action scenes, great storyline and visual effects. Daniel Craig was fantastic. Olga Kurylenko (Camille) is definitely one of the most beautiful and memorable Bond Girls plus she looked much stronger than weak Vesper in Casino Royale. Mathieu Amalric, Judi Dench, Giancarlo Giannini were great as well. Gemma Arterton looked absolutely useless.
Brilliant movie but the soundtrack was very disappointing
irina1296 2 years ago
awesome review for an amazing film (Y)
Serpent2006 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wow... you're accusing those who criticize this movie's frenetic editing as having a short attention span? I consider this movie and its ridiculously hyper editing to be catering to such people. Is it too much to ask that the cameraman just step back and let the *actors* do the stuntwork? Like they did in the *good* Bond movies?
Most of your reviews are good, but you are way off on this disappointing mess. It's down there with Man With the Golden Gun at the bottom of the series.
melosebrainuhoh 2 years ago
I also understood this movie even with this old guy who wouldn't shut up and had some medical problems - thats all true.
bigjamesbondfan 2 years ago
That's the first time I heard the very hot Olga Kurylenko's named pronounced and I agree the very ending of the film was fantastic!
withoutasong 2 years ago 2
wait, did you say new paper back from aren't those like all the 007 novels but on the cover of all them they just have just the girl on covers of all them and title of the book on the women and girls on the covers have diffrent color skin on the covers are those the new paper back forms of the books with just the girls on them and nothing else
5648378 2 years ago
I don't know what you're even saying, all the ones I have are the centennial edition.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
well there are some James Bond books in a paper back forms that just have the bond girls on the cover of all of them and all them have diffrent color skin and they are from peguin books but they are a little cartoonist but they are still really cool I have all of them on my myspace profile in my pictures ablum my favorite bond cover is the Casino Royal cover on the cover of the Casino Royal novel is just Vesper Lynd and she has purple skin and black hair and a black dress
5648378 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dont think your so smart with your sarcasm boy.
«Look at this mythical screen»
The editing is absolutely bad and amateurish to some extent.
If you cant admit the editing is bad, id recommend you to watch The Matrix.
Still best action movie to date and it actually USE REAL FILMING & EDITING.
Watch the subway fight scene for exemple.
In Quantum:
Swingin the camera around dosent bring you into the action, its just a pathetic way to hide the crapiness on screen.
Roger007Poore 2 years ago
Who you calling boy, shithead?
Obviously you have the attention span of a gnat and weren't paying attention. It's almost a shame that they don't chronicle idiocy, as yours speaks volumes.
*almost*
NecroVMX 2 years ago
there is a rumor that ernst stavro blofled will be in bond 23. I think he might be the head of quantum because quantum was obviously used to replace SPECTRE
anahiemduck1 2 years ago
While I'd certainly welcome that, It's probably bull, as the legal issues surrounding use of that character haven't just evaporated
NecroVMX 2 years ago
but man I hope it does I think best actor that would do a great job as Blofled I think would be Robert Carlyle I mean he did a great performance in the world is not enough playing Renard I watched the world is not enough last night and I thought Carlyle would do a damn good job as Blofled I think he's like a strong virson of Blofeld he would do really great job as Blofled if Carlye plays if theres any Blofled actor he reminds you of its Telly Savlas I think
5648378 2 years ago
thats intercting I wonder who will play Blofield in Bond 23? anybody get ideas on any actors that would play Blofield
5648378 2 years ago
I always think that Craig remains of Roger Moore for some reason but he looks like a younger and tougher virson of Moore but I think Dainel Craig is really good and I think it not his fault it just the people think about QOS to much and think it his worst movie which is not I can't wait for the next movie with Craig it going to great
5648378 2 years ago
i didnt like this one ...they tried to make it more modern but no q and it just looked like some action movie ;/
Panther2051 2 years ago
Well done for all your reviews - you're not always right, but I agree about QOS - it's much better than some have said, just lacks a bit of the charm of previous Bonds...
burger4g 2 years ago
No, I'm always right. It's just in those cases that you are wrong.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
wtf this sucked it felt like the new bourne movie only good thing was the acting. the story and action sucked.
the villain was the worst bond villain ever the girl was boring and uninteresting even if she was well acted
5/10
eddyc09 2 years ago
No, you're wrong.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
ehh your wrong what your always right????
eddyc09 2 years ago
Nope, not wrong. You keep trying though.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
lemme guess you get on well with people cuz your irritating as fuck
eddyc09 2 years ago
nope. I'm awesome.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
yeah No! Bourne is naturally a take on the bond films, because they were the first spy film serial. The villian is to represent the dark elemonts of the rich and powerful. The women are both lovely and the main lady female is right on level with bond.
It's a great film.
bigzooweek 2 years ago 2
totally agree. Most stupid bond I have ever seen in my life. I have only watched it through once, without pauses, and have not had enough interest to watch again.
felixonthemac 2 years ago
You have a bit of a brainstorm around the late 1970s and early 1980s...and Tomorrow Never Dies is not worthy of a 9, but otherwise you're ok...
burger4g 2 years ago
No, I'm right in every case. Sorry, you're wrong.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
sorry man this is the only review i dont agree with the girl in this movie was boring and undeveloped and all the scenes we'd seen before.
hell the opener is a chase almost exactly like casino royale
eddyc09 2 years ago
I don't know what you mean by editing but the cameras were pretty poor in this film, most would agree. It's just all over the place especially in the PTS car chase
RyanDahl1080 2 years ago
"most would agree" means nothing to me. most people agree on shit that's wrong all the time.
NecroVMX 2 years ago
This review is so helpful, I have a better understanding of the movie now.
imranBUK 2 years ago
Isn't Vesper Lynd a pun on West Berlin? They both sound very similar, or is it just me?
beanio12 2 years ago
I kinda doubt it
NecroVMX 2 years ago
Well I heard somewhere that Fleming was known to use puns for the names of his characters. Not saying that this is the case here.
beanio12 2 years ago
Flemming puns are more along the lines of "Tiffany Case"
NecroVMX 2 years ago
Or pussy galore.
MoltenPlastic 2 years ago
Yes, you are right. Verper Lynd was indeed a pun on West Berlin... The title track for this movie has got to be one of my least favourite Bond themes ever. Too bad Amy Whinehouse was too out of it to complete the project, I'm sure she'd have written a much, much better song.
lorelei2121 2 years ago
Yes! I've finally found someone who shares my opinion of this film, I think QoS is a great addition to the Bond legacy, and I thoroughly enjoyed your review, great job. I like the tone of the Craig films, two of my favorites, although i like the classics as well.
Honda8994 3 years ago 2
just to let u know, this was not the 25th bond film, about 22nd i think. good reviews though
sxcbex19 3 years ago
It's the 25th, EON aren't the only ones to make bond films.
NecroVMX 3 years ago
I've watched all of your movie reviews and I see a similar comment on almost all of them if not all of them.
beanio12 2 years ago
another man i would consider for bond is richard armitage alot of other people may think hes too serious but i think he could do a good job
tomwood555 3 years ago
i agree i would expect to get paid exactly what i deserved and considering it will be used for a bond film would make me very proud
tomwood555 3 years ago
it shoudnt be a matter of profit it should be continuing the legend of bond
tomwood555 3 years ago
These people chose writing as their profession, meaning they write for a living. You can't expect them to give up the rights to their stories and titles without receiving exactly the amount deserved.
NecroVMX 3 years ago
clive owen would be goog as bond but theres one obstacle his age being 44 i would start to be optimistic but casting him because you want one that will do it for a long time and theres about a year gap between every film discarding die another day and casino royale but a few years back he would of been perfect i would be egging to star hugh jackman or ewan mcgregor id give henry cavill a few more years so not to be too young but i personally hope they use the other authors titles
tomwood555 3 years ago
thats right they should by the rights from the other authors i dont see wy the authors would refuse it will save them the trouble of thinking there own although i still think they should rserve property of a lady its got an interesting twist to it and a film would be interesting anyway if daniel craig didnt exist who would you personally hav e as bond
tomwood555 3 years ago
I was pretty supportive of Clive Owen when he was being considered. It's not that the authors would refuse, it's that they know that the rights to just the titles alone (much less the stories) would be worth and would want a load of money, EON may not think it's worth it and just come up with their own titles.
NecroVMX 3 years ago
what do you mean original titles like making up there own
property of a lady is quite good it was meant to be timothy daltons 3rd film but arguments stopped it
tomwood555 3 years ago
Yes, they'd have to come up with their own, or buy the rights from the other authors, though I'm willing to bed the authors would want a LOT of money for the rights.
I doubt they'll use property of a lady, aside from the fact that they tried once already, the film octopussy was already heavily based on that story.
NecroVMX 3 years ago
even if they dont have the rights there catchy titles and i dont think theres many more ian fleming stories or short stories
tomwood555 3 years ago
No, there aren't very many more. There's 007 In New York, The Hildebrand Rarity, Risico and The Property Of A Lady. It's likely they'll just start using original titles again.
NecroVMX 3 years ago
there bond novels arent they
they have james bond in them isnt that enough
tomwood555 3 years ago
No, EON films only bought the rights to Ian Flemming's titles and most of his stories (all of them except TSWLM, which is why the movie version was a completely different story.) They do not own the rights to the titles or stories written by any other author, though they've borrowed elements of some of them.
NecroVMX 3 years ago
who cares who wrote the book thew pierce brosnan titles werent books until the films were made they should get the rights and make a good film my favourite one is win lose or die i think its classic but hey all have ian flemings own creation 007 and that is whats important
tomwood555 3 years ago
See you're not paying attention. You say "who cares who wrote the book" uh, THEY CAN'T USE THOSE TITLES BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE PROPER RIGHTS TO DO SO.
Yes the brosnan titles were not books...but what you gave me were all titles of books. The two have nothing to do with each other. Please make sense.
NecroVMX 3 years ago
but if they go too far they will ruin it they just need to get back on course with a few massivly good bond films and then start experimenting a bit
anyway lets stop argueing a bond film is a bond film lets talk about titles for the next film iv been looking at some of the novels and i think some good titles will be
win lose or die
seafire
devil may care
high time to kill
tomwood555 3 years ago
They don't have the rights to use the titles of Gardner or Benson's books, that's why they never did. Though Devil May Care may be different because it was written under the name Ian Flemming
NecroVMX 3 years ago
im not saying it wont work and im not saying it will work but its just hard to imagine looking at 2 bond film title sequences and see the names of the main bond girl twice and the series should grow but in a safe way
tomwood555 3 years ago