Quantum of Solace

[Ouch!]

We had a Casino Royale thread a while back that kind of turned into speculation for the next movie, but with the recent explosion of information, I think it's time to open up some discussion for the movie.

Every so often I check up for information on the next James Bond movie. The last time I checked, it was still only tentatively titled Bond 22--recently it received the title of Quantum of Solace, which is taken from Ian Flemming's For Your Eyes Only.

The full cast has been revealed, and it's become apparent that Quantum of Solace won't be taking after any of Ian Flemming's books (although there's still speculations that it'll connect with certain parts of For Your Eyes Only).

For all you crazy gadget lovers, there's some disappointing news. Any gadgets in the film will be strictly based in reality. I suppose that means anything will really be within the technological capabilities of real life.

Here's the imdb page. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0830515/)

[Old Manus]

In b4 stupid name.

To say I'm excited would be an understatement of galactic proportions.

[Ouch!]

The title does seem a little off for a Bond movie; then again, it's the title of one of the short stories in For Your Eyes Only, so at least they didn't pull it out of their asses. As far as what the title means, a character in the short story called the Governor explains that it is "a precise figure defining the comfort, humanity and fellow feeling required between two people for love to survive. If the quantum of solace is nil, then love is dead." Whatever the hell that means.

[edczxcvbnm]

Even though it is an official name, it still reminds me of Castlevania.

[Big D]

Well I'll be jiggered.

This is all sounding rather promising, really.

I'm glad they're going to continue with the 'realistic gadgets' notion from Casino Royale. After From Russia With Love, the gadgets began to get progressively sillier. In the Brosnan era, they were often downright farcical:

*imaginary example*

Bond's off on a mission that'll involve infiltrating a high-tech laboratory in New York City

Q: Now pay attention 007, this could save your life on this mission. It looks like an ordinary stick of rhubarb? Well, it's not. This is a cunningly-disguised quantum decombulator. Activate it by holding it near an open flame, and it emits an ultrasonic tone that will hypnotise any wolves in the area, compelling them to instinctively untie any ropes they can find.

Sure enough, Bond's mission to the high-tech laboratory in New York leads to five separate incidents where his life depends on getting wolves to untie ropes by using the latest over-contrived gadget...

Well, perhaps that's going a little far, but in the Brosnan movies, more often than not, it felt as though each gadget was created solely to rescue bond from one or two very unlikely scenarios.

[Serapy]

The new title reminds me of one of Zidance attacks - Solace. That attack was pretty cool, I'll try to add that to my expection when I see the movie, so if I become dissatisfied while watching the movie, I'll just think of Zidance's Solace!

[XxSephirothxX]

Title definitely feels a little weighty for a Bond film. But I don't really give a :skull::skull::skull::skull: if it's as good as Casino Royale. And the director has made quite a few good films, and the Bond movies are almost always better when actually based on an Ian Fleming story. I have high hopes.

[Serapy]

For some reason, I like the old title better - Bond 22 :/

[Nominus Experse]

In b4 stupid name.
Damn you....


I don't much care for Bond films, but I hear that the screen writer to Crash is set to help collaborate the screenplay for this film, so I may have to see it simply for that.

[Ouch!]

In b4 stupid name.
Damn you....


I don't much care for Bond films, but I hear that the screen writer to Crash is set to help collaborate the screenplay for this film, so I may have to see it simply for that.
They're also bringing in some guy from the Bourne series to work as a second unit director; granted, that position generally doesn't involve much action with actors in particular, but somehow I get the feeling that he may be involved in the car chase. The Bourne movies had some of the most bad ass car chases in any movie ever, and this possibility alone makes me happy.

[Quindiana Jones]

WHAT THE HELL KIND OF NAME IS QUANTUM OF SOLACE?

It gives me rectal cysts just thinking it.

[Breine]

Casino Royale was a good movie, and Daniel Craig was great as Bond and therefore I'm also looking forward to this movie.

.. and I'm glad that this movie won't be gadget-y.

[Vivisteiner]

I hope it involves some Quantum Mechanics in it.

Perhaps it could go over Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle or the Schrodinger equation. Id probably just settle for a description of the electron double slit experiment though.

[Big D]

According to the film's imdb page, as linked by Zaphier:

The meaning of the film's title "Quantum of Solace" is a small degree of comfort that can exist between two people emotionally in a relationship. According to Ben Macintyre of Times Online, the Governor character in the Ian Fleming short story of the same name defines it as "... a precise figure defining the comfort, humanity and fellow feeling required between two people for love to survive. If the quantum of solace is nil, then love is dead."

[ThundagAuron]

I've got high hopes for this one. Casino Royale was incredibly well done. The only thing that irks me (not the title, don't mind it) is the fact that there was an article that said it was rumored to have "twice the action of Casino Royale". That might end up being a mistake because CR had the perfect mix of everything.

[Captain Maxx Power]

I'm glad they're going to continue with the 'realistic gadgets' notion from Casino Royale.

You're kidding right? That movie had a defribulator that brought Bond back to life seconds after it shocked him. That's so far away from how defribulators really work it's ridiculous. Not only that but he walked right back in. He'd have had burns on his chest and most likely major breathing difficulties due to the pressure placed on his chest by the shock.

Having said that I did enjoy Casino Royale, a lot more than any other Bond movie I've seen (I can't sit through one from start to finish they bore the crap out of me), so I'm looking forward somewhat to this next installment if they keep on the same route.

[Big D]

I'm glad they're going to continue with the 'realistic gadgets' notion from Casino Royale.

You're kidding right? That movie had a defribulator that brought Bond back to life seconds after it shocked him. That's so far away from how defribulators really work it's ridiculous.The device itself, at least, is a realistic concept, even if its effects weren't portrayed realistically onscreen:p The same's true of a lot of devices commonly seen in movies, from cars to handguns...
Not only that but he walked right back in. He'd have had burns on his chest and most likely major breathing difficulties due to the pressure placed on his chest by the shock.Indeed. Think that was meant to show that he's badass, and tough enough to temporarily hide the ill-effects. He did, after all, end up having an extended stay in hospital not long after...