Posts Tagged ‘Quantum of Solace’
4 items.
Last week the producers of the James Bond franchise announced the title of the 22nd Bond adventure would be Quantum of Solace. At first, my reaction was much like that of comic Tom’s and I think most people with an average vocabulary were probably left scratching their head. Personally, I found the somewhat brainy title to be incongruent with the gritty, real-world, back-to-basics style the series had adopted with it’s relaunch with Casino Royale. I mean, it does kind of sound like a math problem, doesn’t it?
But now that I’ve had a few days to let the name roll around inside my head for a little bit (and after looking up the contextual definition of “quantum” and “solace”), I find the title to be somewhat poetic and certainly less literal about the danger-plus-sex Bond mythos as titles like Thunderball and Octopussy.
The title was actually taken from Bond creator Ian Flemming himself in a collection of short stories called For Your Eyes Only. Of course, any resemblance between Bond’s 22nd screen adventure and the original short story will be purely incidental. The movie is filming now and will be released by November.
Not a lot to tell you right now. I didn’t get a chance to see any movie this weekend, although I was hoping to have found time to see Rambo. Didn’t work out.
I’m certainly shocked to have learned that Meet The Spartans edged out Rambo for the top spot at the box office this week. I mean, Meet The Spartans? Seriously? That movie has stupid written all over it. The movie comes from the same people who made Epic Movie which was probably one of the worst spoof films I’ve ever seen. The jokes and references were horribly dated. Meet The Spartans sense the same vibe with its unimaginative title. Spoofing Meet The Parents which came out, what? – eight years ago? Even if they were aiming to reference Meet The Fockers, that was four years ago.
I’m certain that all this and more will be covered in tonight’s Triple Feature podcast LIVE at TalkShoe.com this evening at 9:00 PM CST. Be sure to join us LIVE and call in with your questions.
I should mention that TalkShoe changed their interface, so now it’s easier to call in and participate in the real time chat. You don’t have to worry about calling in with a cell phone or even a program like Skype. It can all be done through the TalkShoe application which you download when you sign up for an account. It’s never been easier, so be sure to check us out! I mean, it’s not like there’s anything on TV for you to watch. Thanks, writer’s strike!
See you then!
[ No Comments ]
I can’t tell you how long I agonized over how to write this strip. I think I came up with 5 or 6 different treatments and felt like the “silly name” approach was the least complicated. For example, I read a review for Quantum of Solace that said it had another parkour chase sequence similar to what was in Casino Royale and I was trying to find a way to make a joke out of that. No dice.
So I ended up racking my brain trying to come up with a Bond parody title that wasn’t a direct reference to either Quantum of Solace or any other Bond film like Dr. No or Goldfinger. It was really hard, for some reason. I was bugging Cami about it. I even turned to the people following me on Twitter. At one point Cami said “You’re putting WAY too much thought into this” and she was right. But my mind was on a loop and I couldn’t get out.
This is where it would be extremely advantageous to be part of some kind of comedy-writing team. You could take a completely terrible idea and bounce it off of others until it became completely medicore idea. Hey, it works on MadTV.
I made a joke about Quantum of Solace earlier in the year and really wanted to use the line “it sounds like a math problem again” because, to me, it really sounds like one. But I’ll make due with an Ignar Bergman reference instead.
The title really isn’t a sticking point for me, though. It’s just the most obvious thing to make fun of without having actually seen the movie. First appearances count for a lot, do they not?
For what it’s worth Quantum of Solace was a title that Bond creator Ian Fleming used for a short story that was part of a collection of short stories titled under For Your Eyes Only. Of course, people recognize the title of For Your Eyes Only as that of the 1981 movie starring Roger Moore. The point is that Quantum of Solace wasn’t plucked out of thin air during some marketing meeting, but is actually a throwback to the original Fleming stories as a means to honor the franchise in a similar manner to Casino Royale in 2005.
I think that’s a good thing. Obviously stripping things down worked for them in Casino Royale. I’ve read in reviews that Quantum of Solace literally picks up right were Casino Royale left off. So they’re not taking any chances with the franchise flying off in another direction.
But, at the same time, I kind of miss the tongue-in-cheek randiness of the Roger Moore era. I mean, Octopussy is actually a very terrible title, but it’s also very evocative. Not so grim and serious. I guess I just find it interesting how Bond continues to reflect the tone of society throughout the years. Daniel Craig’s version is much more angry and self-destructive. I’ve read a few articles that explore that as well as the wider phenomenon in modern action movie that don’t project the ideal of physical strength and brutality like they did in the 80’s. But, instead, reflect the inner torment of driven individuals. The next great war will be one of the mind. How does Bond – a relic of the Cold War – fit into that New World Order? Easy. Make him Jason Bourne.
Ooo! Snap! I WENT there!
Anyway, that’s it for me. Just wanted to encourage you guys to check out Monday’s recording of The Triple Feature. We talked about Role Models, JCVD and Kung-Fu Panda (now out on DVD) and I thought we put together a really good show. Lively discussion and hit on some great topics. Had a blast recording it and I really want you guys to check it out. You can subscribe to the podcast through iTunes as well, if you’re interested. But if you haven’t listened before, give it a try!
Later!
[ No Comments ]
This isn’t the first time I’ve depicted Jared as having the sauce and sometimes I wonder if that’s fair. But it’s not like I’ve made it a dominant character trait, so I don’t lose much sleep over it.
I only express mild concern because Jared the comic character is based off a real person and I don’t want to offend him. Secondly, I always second guess comics where I introduce alcohol or other adult themes because I like to believe that Theater Hopper is accessible to a younger audience.
Obviously the comic isn’t sunshine and lollipops all the time (do kids still care about lollipops?) but my rule is never to go any further than what you might see in Prime Time TV. I think we’re still in safe territory here.
SIDEBAR: I just took a closer look at those comics I linked to earlier and the look like friggin’ cave drawings compared to what I’m doing now. I’m not trying to brag, I’m just shocked at my own evolution and am racking my brain a little bit trying to remember when and exactly how I started to change my style. Fun.
I suppose along those lines I can mention that I’m working on Theater Hopper: Year Three. I originally started laying out the book in late Spring with the hopes of taking it to Wizard World Chicago in June, but that didn’t happen and I ended up putting it on the back-burner.
Well, now it’s on the front-burner and I’m half-way through the commentary. You’d think writing commentary for the strips wouldn’t take that long. I essentially do it every Monday, Wednesday and Friday in the present. But there’s something about revisiting that period three years ago that makes it difficult to remember where I was at creatively and what things were important to me back then.
Remember, this is before Henry was born and I feel like a completely different person now.
But the Year Three book is something I want to get right. It was the first year I started to experiment with longer story lines. It was the year I wrote the arc where Jimmy lost his job. It was also the year that I introduced Charlie. I know a lot of people who have written me and talked about how they’ve enjyoed those stories. So I want the behind-the-scene revelations to be satisfying for them.
I generally consider Year Three to be the make-or-break year for Theater Hopper. I started taking more risks creatively and the audience began to solidify. In some ways, it was the high water mark of the strip and I would really like to try and capture that again. But if things hadn’t turned out the way that they did, I probably wouldn’t have continued to pursue the comic.
At any rate, I’m working on it. I’d like to have it out by the holidays, but it’s already mid-November, so that doesn’t seem likely. I know I want to have it in my hands when I go to the Emerald City Comicon in Seattle this April. So keep your eyes peeled for a pre-order opportunity sometime in the new year.
In the meantime, I’m not sure I’ve shared this here or not, but if I have, I’ll post it here again. This is the cover for Year Three:
That’s it for me today. Planning on seeing Quantum of Solace tonight. Cami says she’s not interested in seeing it, so I’m going solo – which is a shame. She really liked Casino Royale. Oh, well. I’ll tell you what I thought of it on Monday.
See you then!
[ No Comments ]
If my inner 10 year-old is right (and he almost always is) bodily function jokes are hilarious. I hope you enjoyed the burping, stink lines and all!
Quantum of Solace was the big box office winner this weekend, crushing the competition with a near $71 million take. What’s more surprising is that it raked in another $30 million on top of Casino Royale. So I guess we can consider this a mandate from the people – Daniel Craig is the balls.
I went to see QoS by myself on Friday night. I can’t remember the last time I went to a movie on opening night. At least not since Henry was born. These days, I catch a lot of matinees. Which kind of sucks because you don’t get the same community movie-going experience. But, on the other hand, you have to put up with a lot less crap.
My showing was sold out and since I was flying solo, people we bouncing me around all over the theater asking if I could move down one, move over here, move over there… I’m usually pretty accommodating. But after the third time, I stayed put. Don’t ask me to move after the the movie has started. Get here early next time!
Even though Cami liked Casino Royale, she wasn’t interested in seeing Quantum of Solace. I asked her why and she said she felt like she had no stake in the movie and that it wasn’t advertised to her at all. She had no idea what it was about and no interest in seeing it.
She wasn’t dismissive toward QoS, just not involved. And I think this is very telling.
Obviously MGM had a reason to promote Casino Royale to everyone and their grandmother two years ago. They had a new Bond and it was essentially a reboot of the franchise. Spread the message far and wide. But I think the studio was a little complacent advertising QoS, perhaps relying a little too much on Casino Royale’s reputation to put them over the top. I talked to a few other friends whose wives and girlfriends weren’t interested in seeing QoS for similar reasons.
I guess the gamble paid off if the movie did $30 million over Casino Royale’s opening weekend box office. I just thought it was an interesting observation.
As for the movie itself, I’ve read several reviews that have called it “brutally efficient” and I would say that is the most apt description. Several of the action sequences take after the Bourne movies and force you to “eat the action” with a lot of hand held close-up shots. That’s fine if the action sequences are staged well. Here, they look like a monkey humping a coconut. It’s hard to tell what’s going on.
Daniel Craig is excellent as Bond. His steel blue eyes dare you to look away lest he snap your neck.
Not a lot of gadgets on display. The movie seems content to “push” existing technology into a more fantastic realm. Super powerful mini-cameras tied to a criminal database, GPS, that sort of thing.
Even the Bond women are toned down a notch. Not a lot of sex or innuendo. One quick roll in the hay and it’s over. This Bond is all about kicking ass and chewing bubble gum and he’s all out of bubble gum.
I have more to say about the plot of the movie. Specifically the ending – how it works while you’re watching it, but left scratching your head afterwords. If you’re interested to hear more, tune in to The Triple Feature podcast tonight at 9:00PM CST over at Talkshoe.com.
I mentioned this last week, but Joe, Gordon and I all have several big anniversaries to celebrate this week as well. Gordon hit #300 at Multiplex last week and Joe Loves Crappy Movies crossed the #400 strip milestone as well. Wednesday, I cross #900 and collectively, the three of us are inching up toward #100 recorded episodes of The Triple Feature. Seems like a good opportunity for a little introspection if there ever was any. Be sure to tune in tonight for the lowdown on that.
One last thing… In anticipation of Wall-E coming out on DVD tomorrow, I’m going to be posting all sorts of little bits and bytes to get you excited about the movie. Today, I have a half dozen clips from the film and they’re all great. So check them out and don’t forget to buy Wall-E on DVD this Tuesday.
Also don’t forget to come back to the site tomorrow when I post my full review of the 3-disc Special Edition! It’s good stuff!
Anyway, the clips. Enjoy and I’ll see you here tomorrow!
Treasures & Trinkets
Elbows (Bonus)
Reason for Bots (Bonus)
Building the Worlds from the Sound Up (Bonus)
Eve’s Entrance (Film)
Trailer
[ No Comments ]
