1. I support more literary dramas in New Bond. Playboys can have a loving and dedicated past, so why not do it?
2. I have no objection to making New Bond unkempt for an entire film. Why does Bond have to be as suave as Brosnan does?
3. I also have no objection to New Bond copying The Bourne Bourne, or 24 Hours, or Die Hard. Do global travel, no problem. Play with a camcorder, no problem. Counter-Strike, no problem. Anti-terrorism is also anti-system, no problem. Violence, no problem. Muscle man, still no problem.
The point is whether all of this adds up to a good outcome as an essentially entertainment blockbuster. The first episode of New Bond proved to be a very good result, and the second episode of New Bond proved to be a terrible result.
If you want to see the gap between marc forster and martin campbell, just look at the two-man chase fight scene that serves almost the same function at the beginning of the two films. Regardless of the new element of extreme sports added by martin campbell, the key point is that in comparison, forster looks like a beginner who can't move mirrors and edit. The whole scene is messy and confusing, you don't know where the two are with each other, what's going on between them, all you see is a blurry, fast-moving close-up + super-fast cuts. Intensfied editing mentioned by Bordwell does not mean that it is enough to give people the feeling of intensive. Even the most basic establishing shot cannot be taken. If it is not good, it is impossible to shoot wonderful action scenes with just a little fancy lens.
In the same way, whether it is a fight between two people, or the entanglement of two planes in the air, or the car chase at the beginning, all the faults are the same, the editing is too messy, and completely disorienting the audience.
So, Hollywood blockbusters are not so easy to shoot, huh, huh.
View more about Quantum of Solace reviews
