Printable View
The tickets for the premiere of QoS go on sale tomorrow, and me and some friends are getting ready to buy them. Then I heard rumors that it will be released a week after the rest of the world here in Norway. So I headed over to IMDB to check if this is true. Here is the complete list.
What makes France, Sweden and UK more important than the rest of the world? Why do they get to see the movie an entire week before the I do? I thought big movies were released on the same day worldwide!
That is strange. I guess that's a thanks for supporting the first movie first perhaps?
Not strange at all -- with big movie releases, they like to make big press events out of the premieres to have the stars show up and walk the red carpet, photo ops, etc. Daniel Craig will be on a learjet flying around the globe for the next 3-4 weeks.
be glad you're not in Japan.
I can see the UK. But Sweden?
Comcast probably has something to do with it.
...and what about New Zealand? 27th of November!
So, who else are going to watch it premiere night?
They are playing it here during the BFI Festival but I have yet to see the last bond so I didn't get tickets.
I'm glad someone posted about this movie. It actually looks like one of the best Bond movies. I'm starting to really like the new Bond, he seems really down to Earth in the first one "Casino".
It hits theatres in Canada on Nov 14
It hits theaters in USA on Nov 14 too
ps
notice the respect in spelling theaters theatres.
:)
I didn't realize that Terence and Philip spelled it like that as well.
We've got premiere tickets to see it this Friday (thats the 7th btw). Come Saturday morning and I'll spoil the entire movie in this thread! Muwahahaha!
Oh, and I'm watching a movie, so it is shown in the cinema. I didn't know there was a play-group on tour too. Is it a musical or just a regular play?
Not if I do first.Quote:
Originally Posted by ihoss.com
It was alright.
spoilers
james bond lives
he kills bad guys
he has sex with at least 2 differnt women.
Spoiler.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverx2
One of the above is wrong.
I've got premier tickets for the Canada premier (the 14th)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ctranter
Is it wrong that Bond lives?
Is it wrong that He kills the bad guy?
It can't be wrong to have sex with at least two women.
Watched it last saturday. It was entertaining, but not extremely good :)
cant wait for this!
Yes, because this guy is NOT James Bond.Quote:
Is it wrong that Bond lives?
- You missed India ! The movie is releasing in India on the same date too !Quote:
What makes France, Sweden and UK more important than the rest of the world?
So, by now even the Americans will have seen it. What do you think?
SPOILER ALERT!
I didn't like it very much. The movie started with an action scene (the car chase), then a short break, and another action scene (the boat chase), then another break (the opera scene, which I really liked) and then there was the third action scene (the on foot chase). By now the filmmakers decided to do something artistic and show that this was normal for Bond by muting the sound and playing opera on top. That annoyed me. It seemed like they tried to push as many chases and action scenes as possible into the movie to get this point across, but they failed miserably.
Bond was too American in this movie, not British as he usually is. Bond is the only spy who can share a good dinner with his arch nemesis at a secret lair. Last time they played poker! This time he can hardly go to a party without being accused of murder.
The ending was too anti-climatic. First of, who builds a hotel out of flammable material in the desert with hydrogen tanks in each room? And who sets the finale of a bond movie to said hotel? Here is the end of the movie:
Bond fights the villain for a while, then leaves him (dead, I thought) to sit in a corner with his lady friend while the hotel burns (explodes, actually). They survive a canister of Hydrogen blowing up (an explosion that looks a lot like burning petrol) and see the villain apparently alive heading into the desert.
Cut.
A hydrogen car is driving into the desert. In the boot the villain is tide up. He is left in the desert with a can of motor oil.
End of climatic action scene.
What kind of an ending is that? The car chase in the beginning was more climatic! Bond saving the world by solving a rubiks cube would be more climatic!
So, end of my rant. What do you guys think, was this better than Casino Royale?
Saw it today, and no, not better than Casino Royale by a long shot. Still better than a lot of the garbage they've produced in the past though.
Not that Bond movies have ever been a bastion of believability, but this definitely took big steps back into "you can't be serious" territory, compared with its predecessor. The hydrogen hotel was a huge part of that.
I do like how they've established a coherent plot line over Bond's ongoing conflict with SPECTRE....er Quantum...and hope they stick to it. The Goldfinger reference was awesome.
Too much action in this one, the character development felt like exposition. And it suffered from the same camera work all new action films do: tight shots with lots of movement and quick cuts so you can't tell what's going on. It adds energy, but it's disorienting. I'm sure it also cuts production costs by not having to pay attention to the set as much.
Not as good as Casino Royale, but better than a lot of other crappy Bond films.
Anyone notice the opening credits were done by MK12? That and the new bond song were layered very cool.
At first I appreciated the frequency of the action scenes but it failed to fill in the info I was really interested in and despite quantums reach, they didn't feel threatening. I agree with asheep on it being too american and "rambo"-ish. The ending was not only anti-climactic, there was no sense of revenge.
Still, much better than the last couple of actors and there sci-fi plots.
I'm going to have to disagree with most people in this thread.
I liked it. A lot. And the gripe about "too American"... whatev. He was pissed off to a new level of pisstivity. And I sorta liked that, almost a bit too aggro though.
Regardless. Better than Lazenby's Bond film. Better than Roger Moore's too - and I liked the rank hedonism that man brought to the character.
- I disagree ! Roger Moore was absolutely fantastic - be it in Moonraker or Octo*****.Quote:
Better than Roger Moore's too
Moore was a fat clown.
But he was a horndog. And that gives him a few points in my book.
Nobody can beat Sean Connery with his thick accent.
Choose your Bond -
http://www.freewebs.com/jamesbond007...nds%20OO74.jpg