Skip to comments.James Bond finds 'Solace' a bit Chile
Posted on 04/05/2008 5:21:48 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
After getting the bad end of his own ax in a fight, a bloodied villain limps alone in a stark desert. Mathieu Amalric stumbles to the red, rocky ground. "CUT!" rings loudly from the set of the 22nd James Bond film.
Picking up an hour after "Casino Royale" left off, "Quantum of Solace" is the spy franchise's first direct sequel. Filming began in January and has taken the crew from Britain to Panama to this moonlike landscape in northern Chile, which is standing in for Bolivia.
It's a place that director Marc Forster said evokes Bond's "isolation and loneliness."
"He is an assassin, he is a secret agent, and that reflects a certain lifestyle, which is lonely," said Forster.
"It's kind of Bond's journey into, at first we think it's vengeance, but it goes somewhere else," Craig said. "They've killed the love of his life, this organization, and we don't know who this organization are, and he needs to find out who they are. And it's for personal reasons but also professional reasons."
Craig said that aside from some communications equipment, "Quantum" puts little emphasis on gee-whiz electronics.
"The Aston Martin's there, and that's still the best gadget we have," he said.
And Craig, who turned 40 while filming in Panama, said he'd keep playing Bond so long as the quality remains high.
"I want them to stand alone and be good films," he said. "As long as that continues, then we'll keep making them. And if it doesn't, then we'll stop."
(Excerpt) Read more at real-us.news.yahoo.com ...
At first, I was really skeptical about Craig when I heard he was the new Bond. But after watching ‘Casino Royale’, I can’t wait for this next Bond movie.
When my dad and I first heard that he broke his nose on the first day of filming, we said “Oh great, this guy is gonna suck and he’s gonna ruin Bond.” Turns out he was so into the movie, that he threw his soul into it.
I'm still skeptical about Craig after reading a few of his "fascinated by Obama" comments...
but he is no worse than the typical Hollywood lefty and Casino Royale was a huge step in the right direction for James Bond.
Looking forward to it as long as Craig doesn't go too Clooney Looney.
I’m sure being an Englishman he is to the left of most in America. The outstanding job he did in Casino Royale proves what a good actor he is. I have liked him in everything I have seen him in. And he hasn’t been too out there with his politics the best I can tell. He has been asked questions and answered honestly, which I can’t fault him for.
I do think “Quantum of Solace” is an awful title though.
I will watch this one. Actually Craig’s first Bond movie is the only one since Sean Connery as Bond that I have really liked. Connery and Craig are very different but both excellent.
You might like to DL a movie named “Layer Cake” to see more of Craig. Good movie.
His discussion of playing the Lucifer character in the Golden Compass put a chill down my spine. He enthused at length about his complete agreement with Pullman’s worldview and philosophy.
Still, a soulless actor playing Bond is not necessarily a bad thing. Bond, as Fleming wrote him, was a borderline sociopath unfit for normal society and relationships, but redeemed by his usefulness in the extraordinary circumstances into which the novels thrust him.
Bond only kills targets of British intelligence; Craig wants to kill God. With typecasting like that, how wrong can the film go?
“Quantum of Solace” is the title of one of Fleming’s early short stories. In the new film, “Quantum” apparently is the name of the Spectre/SMERSH-like organization that Bond takes on.
I’m a big James Bond fan and can find something to like in all the movies, although I must say Die Another Day is my least favorite. I actually have a soft spot for two of the films people usually rag on, “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” and “The Living Daylights.” Connery originated the role and the era/style that really made the first few movies special doesn’t exist any more. They are classics. I think OHMSS would be regarded as the best by everyone if Connery had starred. Lazenby never really got a chance but for some reason I liked him. Sort of a Bizarro world Bond. Roger Moore’s 70’s Bonds have dated poorly due to the goofy styles of the day, but they were the ones I loved renting from the video store as a kid on sleepover night. Moore was a real wit and he sort of reminds me of my Granddad. Dalton was really under-appreciated and both his movies had solid scripts. Generally the Bonds are better when they focused a good story rather than just checking all the boxes. That’s the problem with the Brosnan movies I think. I hear the knock on the new movie is that it removes too many of the Bondisms we know and lov, which is sort of the opposite problem. I can’t wait to check it out for myself. Since I love talking about James Bond so much, I’ll also pointout that its one of the rare cases that the movies are better the books, which are relatively lacking in imagination and wit.
You are clearly right. For all of us, the era in which we were young defines "classy" for us.
“...and we don’t know who this organization (is)...”
Well, Duh. This IS a Hollywood movie; it’s obviously Bush’s Fault that his girlfriend was killed, LOL! :)
One of my favorite Bond moments was the movie Octopussy. The scene where he crashes onto the air base and a security police car get wiped out. The audience cheered. I saw it at an US Air Force base theater.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.