http://www.thelmagazine.com/TheMeasure/archives/2008/11/17/top-5-bizarre-and-often-contradictory-criticisms-of-quantum-of-solace-in-ascending-order-of-weirdness-and-with-accompanying-questions Comments On: Top 5 Bizarre and Often Contradictory Criticisms of Quantum of Solace, In Ascending Order of Weirdness, and With Accompanying Questions by Jesse en-us Copyright 2009 The L Magazine. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The L Magazine readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The L Magazine. wil@desert.net (The L Magazine Webmaster) Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0500 Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:45:00 -0500 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by Adam]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:54:00 -0500 The L Magazine
This is surely correct, right?
Posted by Mark]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:53:00 -0500 The L Magazine Posted by Adam]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:52:00 -0500 The L Magazine

Posted by gjk]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:51:00 -0500 The L Magazine
So it's not really a matter of whether low culture is or isn't a suitable vehicle for this kind of content. But, you know, it should be judged on the basis of how well it actually does it. (In a lot of ways Batman-Bergman is a terrible pullquote because it implies that there is a high-art/low-art -- or "films" vs. "movies," ich -- dichotomy. I prefer to use the quote to imply that there's a difference in execution.) So:

"Is it really so terrible to inject a little bit of recognizable human behavior into an action movie, just because there's a French movie playing on three screens that is probably a better family comedy-drama than Quantum of Solace?"

No, but it is pretty terrible to pretend that the movie helping to restrict the French movie to just three screens is any kind of substitute for what it provides. People wouldn't be complaining about the seriousness of Quantum of Solace if it'd pulled it off -- everybody dug Casino Royale. (Probably because everybody's crushing on Eva Green, but still.)
Posted by Mark]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:50:00 -0500 The L Magazine
(That's a general problem I have with the TONY film critics. They're awfully highfalutin' considering they work for a magazine that does a sex issue three times a year.)
Posted by jesse]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:49:00 -0500 The L Magazine
I dunno, I see your point about "where you know a bit more about Bond's emotions," it's just that I... don't really see the point of knowing a bit more about Bond's emotions. I mean, A Christmas Tale opened this past weekend, too, and that's more than enough movie for all your emotional needs. Not to get all high culture/low culture about it, but, you know, I think in this era of Cultural Studies (next hot thesis topic: video games!) we sometimes muddy the waters a bit. Or, as David Fear said, "this is Batman, not Bergman." And there is a difference.

I think too that this would be an easier thing to keep a handle on if the average 21st century action director was, you know, a competent action director. But he's not, he's Bret Ratner. (Come back to the five and dime, Martin Campbell; you handled some great sequences in Casion Royale. It's not much, but it's everything.)

P.S. Because it seems worth mentioning, I don't remember caring much for the Brosnan ones I saw, either; they seemed gimmicky rather than genuinely diverting a la the Connery ones. I do like Brosnan, though, primarily as a light comedian.
Posted by Mark]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:48:00 -0500 The L Magazine
So if you hire someone in the middle -- which is basically who should be doing Bond movies as far as I'm concerned, these not-quite-hacks who nonetheless don't make interesting movies even close to automatically -- you get hit with "what, I'm supposed to take this seriously now?! Good God."

I know we critics are supposed to abhor the middle ground, but it seems to me that's exactly what's warranted here. It's not an arty reinvention that takes Bond far too seriously, but it's a little more human than the cartoonier Moore/Brosnan years. So you get a director who's tasteful and fairly professional but not exactly known for his galvanizing vision. And you get an action movie where you know a little bit more about Bond's emotions but it's not so self-serious that he doesn't jump out of planes and sleep with girls named Strawberry Fields.
Posted by jesse]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:47:00 -0500 The L Magazine
As for 5, 3, 1, I dunno, I tend to agree with A.O. Scott inasmuch as if I wanted to go see a "good" movie about the "serious" "emotions" of a "relatable" "character", I would not so much go see the movie written by Paul Haggis and directed by Marc Forster.

You are correct about Dan Craig's dreamy eyes however.
Posted by Mark]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:46:00 -0500 The L Magazine