Talk:Quantum of Solace

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Quantum of Solace article.
Article policies
Archives: 1

This article uses British english dialect and spelling.
According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Images

Can images taken during filming - http://justjared.buzznet.com/2008/01/04/daniel-craig-bond-22/#more-23045 - be used as images for the article? 86.148.60.167 (talk) 23:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that would depend on who took the picture and what licence they 'released' it under. Ged UK (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Risico

[1] Here is the original rumour from The Sun regarding the film's plot. Variety and the BBC may be reporting likewise, but I believe we should wait for a reliable source, as with the current three cites in the Premise section. Alientraveller (talk) 11:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

So Variety isn't a reliable source? 194.238.70.70 (talk) 11:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Most of the time anyway. I like it when The Hollywood Reporter reports the same thing. But in this case someone at the trade was possibly being lazy. Heh. Alientraveller (talk) 11:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
In your opinion, but we don't have the facts. It could be that Variety got the Risico piece from the same insider as the Sun. I think we should keep it in, as it does say "Variety reports" and not as solid fact. 194.238.70.70 (talk) 11:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I could compromise to that degree, and add the BBC's mention too. That way they look stupid and Wikipedia doesn't if it turns out to be just a rumour. Lol. Alientraveller (talk) 11:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree194.238.70.70 (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
The Risico claim has now been removed by the BBC from their news story. - X201 (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


Quote from Haggis on MI6 website backs up original story as well.
"It’s something I was really concerned about doing because I liked Casino Royale so much, I had such fun doing it and I thought I could only fail by trying to do it again. But I’m giving it a shot and it’s an original and it’s not based on any book or short story or anything that Ian Fleming had done. Although it is based on Ian Fleming ideas. And it starts right after the last one, two minutes after Casino Royale this movie starts." - X201 (talk) 12:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Since it has been reported in reputable media, the current rumor regarding Risico should be kept - but as noted above, cited as having been debunked by the writer. If nothing else it'll discourage anyone deciding to treat it as fact and changing the name of this article to Risico prematurely. I would expect that a final title will be announced within a month, if not within days, since previously a teaser trailer for Casino Royale was in theatres while the film was still shooting, so presumably we'll see something similar for Bond 22, especially with Star Trek 11's first trailer hitting theatres in the next few days. EON needs to settle upon a title soon so that promotion can begin in earnest. (Hopefully this decision won't be affected by the WGA strike but in theory it could be if the title is not from Fleming and is an original creation, and if the writers had not yet come up with a final title before the strike began). 68.146.41.232 (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Casino Royale was announced early on in production because the name itself would be enough to generate interest, especially with a new Bond actor. As the interest for Bond 22 is on the back of the previous film, then the producers have the luxury of holding back the title till their time is right. 86.158.230.218 (talk) 13:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The "Organisation"

In a recent interview Craig mentioned that the Organisation "is destabilising the world’s economy because they want to take it over" (Here) and in an earlier interview said "They’re trying to destabilize the world with money, they’re using money as the tool? They don’t care who they kill or who they displace. And we don’t know who the top man is yet. Hopefully we’ll find out who that is in the next Bond movie." (Here) - Should we have a section in the article, or a separate page, on the "Organisation", with known members (White, Le Chiffre, (potentially) Mathis (even if he is double) etc.? I say this because the Organisation seems to be a big story arc over the 2 (or more) films. 86.158.230.218 (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Wouldn't have before, but now that we know the organization's name - Quantum - a seperate page would be good. For the moment it can just be a stub like the Dominic Greene page, then we can add details as they come out. 147.9.201.209 (talk) 15:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Done. Look for it at Quantum (James Bond), and please help develop it as time goes by. 147.9.201.240 (talk) 21:00, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another debunked title rumor

The website MI6.co.uk is reporting that some French media are reporting that the title of Bond 22 is to be The Emerald Sphere but this has been debunked. Apparently that was the title used for French-language publications of "Property of a Lady" so it's that chestnut again. I mention it here for the record in case someone tries to suggest "Emerald Sphere" is the actual title (i.e. by page-moving,adding info, etc.). I noticed an anonymous IP has already tried to change the title to Property of a Lady in the main films article, but it was reverted. The MI6 article can be found here .23skidoo (talk) 15:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Who was it debunked by? just MI6.co.uk? I think it should be mentioned in the article as a rumour, as it was mentioned in more than one publication 86.160.10.107 (talk) 12:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
It's been dismissed, then it's not notable. Now please, we already have Variety making a fool of themselves. Alientraveller (talk) 17:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Connery?

Acording to many sites Sean Connery has expressed interest in playing a James Bond villian in a future film, should this be added to the artichle someway, or just be considered a useless rumour? Joergentf (talk) 23 may 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 19:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

reference? Ultra! 20:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
I've read that too. Nevertheless, it should not be included on this page because he is not playing the villian in the film. (if a reference was found, it would be worth noting on the page for the series in general.)Cbradshaw (talk) 21:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
It was very likely to be a joke. Alientraveller (talk) 21:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rotten Tomatoes

The Rotten Tomatoes ref that I've just put in the article to cite an interview with DC currently points to a cached version of the page. RT are making some site changes at the mo and have got broken links all over the place. I will correct the link and put a full citation when their site is back to norm. - X201 (talk) 15:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Title disambiguation

I notice the hatnote I added to the short story has been removed for a db page. I think the film title classifies massively as the common usage, and a hatnote to the story on this page is more appropriate than a db page. FYI I have also opened this topic on the db page, someone else can decide the appropriate location as and when. MickMacNee (talk) 13:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Dab was really not needed, as there is no other article with the same title (the short story didn't have its own article). I've moved this article to just Quantum of Solace. Neıl ☎ 14:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Title explanation

I've had no luck trying to confirm the origin of the Fleming title. The closest I've come is a quotation from Lucretius, "quantum solis secedit ab orbi", but am hoping a Fleming expert could confirm or deny this. - Dravecky (talk) 14:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

While Wikipedia is not a forum, I can only assume the title was based Bond getting revenge for Vesper and his new relationship with Camille. wiktionary:quantum, and wiktionary:solace could help you. In any case, hopefully we will get an explanation for the title's choice. Alientraveller (talk) 14:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
As I remember from reading the book, it's about trying to apply a measurement to emotion (almost like a litre of love, a metre of hate, a pound of sorrow, etc) - it's a single measurement of solace. This is all OR as I don't have the book to hand. Neıl ☎ 16:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I do have the book to hand now - "quantum of solace" basically means "degree of comfort,". The guy (Masters) and Rhoda weren't able to work through their problems, instead being utterly effing brutal to one another, because they had lost their "quantum of solace" ("degree of comfort") towards one another. It sort of ties in with Casino Royale - Vesper Lynd convinced Bond that he didn't have to keep doing terrible acts just because he had done so in the past. When Vesper betrayed him, he lost his "quantum of solace", becoming the cold-hearted killer and womaniser we all know and love. Neıl ☎ 18:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Please don't think this is a linkspam (which would be a silly thing to do on the talk page anyway!), but I just wrote an article about this on my blog - the original Quantum of Solace was my favourite of all the James Bond stories, you see. Take a look, if you're interested: [2]. Lordrosemount (talk) 00:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Title in lead

It is not redundant to explain the origin of the title in the lead. Not everyone will notice the dab notice, and I've already seen many forum postings asking where this title came from. As far as what the title means, that's something to be handled elsewhere -- or possibly even under the original story's section in For Your Eyes Only. But it's an important piece of information to have in the lead stating that the title came from Fleming. I can live without the "announced on Jan 24" bit - I only put it there assuming someone would want this information included. 23skidoo (talk) 15:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I shortened it. Alientraveller (talk) 15:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Works for me - cheers! 23skidoo (talk) 15:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Related to the short story, I just added a line in the development section stating that it's yet to be seen if any elements of the short story make it into the film other than the title. This might seem obvious, but I think it's worth mentioning here as the plot details as presently known/announced do not reflect the story, but that may change. Or, it may be an in-title-only adaptation, as was the case with A View to a Kill. 23skidoo (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Logo

http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/847/847387p1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCRendle (talk • contribs)

Although it is a tabloid, The Daily Telegraph has a poster for the film. Fan art? Watch this space. Alientraveller (talk) 17:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, it's fanart. Someone posted on CommanderBond.net months ago. Cyclone49 (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
And now somebody uploaded it over the poster. I reverted it. Can an administrator delete the wrongful file in case someone tries to revert it? Alientraveller (talk) 20:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Working titles

Since it was published in reputable media (Variety, for one), it's probably worth noting at some point the Risico rumor. I also note the new addition that Wilson has been quoted as saying the title was only chosen a few days ago. There is already some speculation they picked Quantum because of the rumors surrounding Property of a Lady or RIsico. No point mentioning this in the article unless there's a source, of course, but if this WAS a "Plan B" title, I would expect we'll hear this in interviews in the coming weeks. Something worth keeping an eye out for. 23skidoo (talk) 17:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Just adding to the above, the current issue of Wizard magazine (a major US publication deadling with comic books and SF film and TV) reports that another expected title for the film was going to be just 007. 23skidoo (talk) 14:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I honestly think that a vast number of these reports have come from the number of times people have added them to Wikipedia. - X201 (talk) 14:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Commendation

Having kept my eyes off the article due to the flurry of rumors early in 2007, I'm pleased to see the article in excellent condition on the day the film's final title was revealed. I've made a few small changes to the article, but all in all, it's a great read for a film still far in the future. I applaud the editors who have taken the time to improve and maintain the article. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rory Kinnear for Bill Tanner?

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7208410.stm - feel free to add to article if other sources confirm... sounds pretty solid to me. Tilefish (talk) 12:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling

I know this is a British film and film series. However, what is the protocol on spelling in Wikipedia? For example organization spelled "organisation." I mean yes this isn't a huge deal but it is interesting to note for Wikipedia that yes British English and United States English have their distinctions. Risico001 (talk) 17:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR is what you need. - X201 (talk) 18:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Craig on the meaning of the title

A clip on CNN.com that was posted the day the title was announced had Daniel Craig giving a not-bad explanation of what the title means. Unfortunately CNN.com video links are temporary so are unsuitable for an article like this, but if he said it to CNN he probably said it to some newspaper or magazine writers, too. It's something that would be worth adding to the article (if someone hasn't already done so). 23skidoo (talk) 16:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, we have a whole paragraph discussing the title. Alientraveller (talk) 16:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Was this what he said? [3] - X201 (talk) 16:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it's all here. Alientraveller (talk) 16:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
That's perfect. I thought Craig did a fantastic job of explaining what it was all about. It's cool when the lead actor has clearly read the source material (even if only the title is likely to be used). 23skidoo (talk) 14:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Green Planet"

This page and the pages for both Mr. White and Dominic Greene both state that the name of the shadow terrorist organization Bond will go after is "Green Planet." They list the source here http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=21851. The relevant information follows;

"We have learned that the plot centres on an attempted coup in a South American country. Dominic Greene^ (Mathieu Amalric), who works behind the cover of an organisation called Green Planet, wants to control one of the world's most important natural resources* and to aid in this he makes a deal with an exiled South American general to get him back into power."

"Behind the cover of an organization called Green Planet" implies pretty clearly that Green Planet is not the name of the terrorist organization itself, but is simply a public front for it, probably based on Mr. Greene's last name. If there is any further proof that GP is really the name of the new organization and not simply a front, please post it, but the article cited isn't enough to go on.147.9.167.197 (talk) 21:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

It's verified from a reliable source. What else do you want? El Greco(talk) 22:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Your only reliable source is the above article, which doesn't state that GP is the terrorists' name. Or do you not understand what a "cover" means?147.9.167.197 (talk) 22:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I think your argument relies on the assumption that the organization cannot be called Green Planet just because the name is used as a cover. There's no indication that there's a "real name" like S.P.E.C.T.R.E. behind it. The content reflects that Green Planet is an organization that passes itself as benevolent, when in reality, it is malevolent. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Good point, hadn't thought of that. I'm not saying Green Planet isn't the name of the bad guys though, just that if the paragraph quoted is all we have to go on, there's enough doubt that it shouldn't be stated unequivocally that GP is the real name. At this point, we just aren't sure yet.147.9.167.197 (talk) 22:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps a re-wording close to what the Empire article says? Or quote it directly? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
"Quantum..." not Greene Planet. Shiny! I was right! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.201.163 (talk) 19:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plot

In the first paragraph it reads "Bond is tracking down Green Planet,[3] the organisation that caused the death of his lover Vesper Lynd. He comes across a member of GP named Dominic Greene, played by Mathieu Amalric, who intends to stage a coup d'état in a Latin American country. Bond is assisted by Camille, played by Olga Kurylenko, who also wants revenge against Greene.", and this is basically repeated in the Premise section, do we really need this twice? 86.158.228.170 (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The lead summarises the entire article and has to be stand alone. In fact, Camille's vendetta is only mentioned in the cast section. Alientraveller (talk) 12:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Slate

Please be aware that the character named "Mr. Slate" has not been confirmed as the traitor. I know the AOL video was referenced as a source, however, Judi Dench's M only says that Bond killed Slate. Nowhere does it meaniton Slate as being a traitor or even why Bond killed him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.90.102 (talk) 02:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Al Pacino

For the record, here is the producers' denial. [4] Alientraveller (talk) 22:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

k thanx 68.195.59.194 (talk) 00:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Siena Cathedral

There is an image that has recently been added stating that the producers decided not to film the safehouse scenes in the Cathedral because it would be disrespectful. This is only half true. The original plan was the have the climax of the Siena chase sequences - NOT the safehouse - inside the Cathedral, which was changed becase it was disrespectful. The plan now is to apaprently have Bond emerge in the middle of the Piazza where the palio is run at the moment the race finishes, or something like that. I'd edit the caption myself, but I'm not sure I'd get it right.Nearly famous writer (talk) 00:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

"Apparently, the chase sequence was originally written to end at the Siena Duomo (cathedral), but this was later discarded as it was seen to be disrespectful to the location. Instead, 007 will emerge from the fountain in the Piazza del Campo just at the moment that the horse race ends. The network of underground tunnels ('bottini') were reconstructed in Pinewood as filming at the real location was not possible."

The news article doesn't make grammatical sense. Alientraveller (talk) 10:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Hang on, I get it know. Bond chases a baddie into the city's cisterns, but this does not necessarily mean the MI6 safehouse is where Bond defeats him. Alientraveller (talk) 10:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah. Truth is, we don't know much. I just put this message on this page in the first place because I knew it to be wrong. All I can really ay is that the safehouse is somewhere under Siena and that the chase was slated to finish inthe Cathedral, but they changed it to the piazza.Nearly famous writer (talk) 23:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The name of the organisation and the natural resource [SPOILERS]

Hey guys; producer Michael G Wilson has revealed that the name of he organisation is "Quantum" and that the natural resource is water (it was in USA Today). I know these are big spoilers, but it was announced in a press conferenc last week (there was an embargo on the media until today), and you're not going to be able to read a report on filming between now and November without it mentioning this stuff.Nearly famous writer (talk) 11:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

From USA Today. I'll leave the natural resource a secret in the article for now, but I think that the organisation's real name being Quantum needs to be mentioned (Green Planet I guess is just Greene's cover). Alientraveller (talk) 12:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
All implemented now. Alientraveller (talk) 16:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Shiny. Like I said, you won't be able to read an article on the film without it being mentioned. Quantum seem to be the resident Big Bads (sorry for sing the Buffy term ...), but Green Planet is the immediate threat. The spelling of the shell company's name is currently unknown as various sources are reporting "Green" and "Greene", but I think it's the latter as a newswrap video showed a cargoship painted with the name "Evergreen" along its side.Nearly famous writer (talk) 02:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
LOL! "Evergreen". Gotta love those Bond puns. Alientraveller (talk) 09:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Wow, I didn't even pick up on that and I'm well-versed in the Bond mythology. I think it's more coincidence than anything else, though; if Vesper had not been played by Eva Green, the ship would still have been named Evergreen. If it's even in the film, that is: it's only been seen in th background once. Nearly famous writer (talk) 06:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Green/Greene Planet

Minor detail, but the name of Dominic Greene's shell corporation is "Greene Planet", not "Green Plaet". I've seen spyshots of signage at the fundraiser - it's also just visible in videos by the likes of ET and The Insider - and I probably shouldn't be posting a link to them as they're spyshots, but it's definately called "Greene Planet".Nearly famous writer (talk) 23:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

We need something more than "I saw it" as a reference. No one else can verify the information without some reference and the pictures wouldn't work unless they were published by a valid source. ~QuasiAbstract (talk/contrib) 07:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Green Planet is how it's spelt in the cite. Alientraveller (talk) 08:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmmmm, the person who posted the photo I was using for reference seems to have moved or deleted it ... I would have posted it sooner, but I come from a forum where there's a big crackdown on copyright images, and I wasn't sure where on the scale this photo fell. Damn. Nearly famous writer (talk) 00:37, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Intro too long

Someone fix the intro, it's too long. See {{intro-toolong}} for more info. StevePrutz (talk) 08:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

No, see WP:LEAD. Alientraveller (talk) 08:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
I disagree. Take a step back and compare it with some other quality film articles. It has stuff that is commonly in the body. StevePrutz (talk) 09:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Well start explaining why you think it's "long". It meets lead criteria and perfectly describes the plot, characters and production. Alientraveller (talk) 09:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Poster

Is this poster official? David Pro (talk) 21:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

No. Alientraveller (talk) 09:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Definitely not; that's been around since Casino Royale was finished. It's good - a few news sources actually ran it and another as the teaser posters in the lead-up to the announcement of the film back in January - but it's a fake. The final poster probably won't be revealed for some time.Nearly famous writer (talk) 03:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Car

Shouldn't the car that was driven into the river by accident be mentioned? I know its not important but its a funny fact. Lovingnews1989 (talk) 11:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Not really. The accident that hospitalised the stuntman is important because it led to produvtion shuting down so the Italian authorities could investigate. You said it yourself: some guy having a bit of fun in a DBS and then landing in the water isn't. Nearly famous writer (talk) 14:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bond 23 Article

There should be an article for the sequel film. 86.139.146.148 (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It's too early. El Greco(talk) 23:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. If history repeats itself, however, an official announcement for Bond 23 could occur before the end of production of QoS or its release, just as happened with Casino Royale. 23skidoo (talk) 18:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Reading the guidlines it is too early for a article. 86.139.146.148 (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Curse?

Should the article mention the jinxed car crash? --81.1.104.116 (talk) 19:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

references Ultra! 20:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
And who, besides the tabloids, is saying it's jinxed? There's zero proof of some kind of curse on the film, and as a previous director - I think it was Spottiswoode - pointed out, accidents happen. There have been plenty of accidents during production of the Bond films before now, so why should we be making an exception here? Quantum of Solace just got more media attention because it's the world's biggest film franchise. Nearly famous writer (talk) 04:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Mentioning the accidents is certainly justified, but to use terms such as "cursed" violates WP:NOR. 23skidoo (talk) 18:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Characters

Since the series has been rebooted, does this mean that they might bring back some older characters that were killed off in the previous film time-line (good or bad)? Obviously they're not doing it for this film, but is there any indication that they will? Emperor001 (talk) 01:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The only characters they MIGHT bring back are Q and Moneypenny. There's been calls on fan forums for a return of Ernst Starvo Blofeld, but I personally think he's even less likely. Beyond the usual suspects, no villains or Bond Girls will be coming back. Craig's continuity might be separate from the previous 20 films, but the villains from them are still considered dead by the series canon. Besides, bringing them back would be pointless. Nearly famous writer (talk) 09:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)