Quantum of Solace Review [2]
Posted by Matthew Motiuk on 11.16.2008
The title isn’t the only thing wrong with the latest Bond movie.
Cast:
Daniel Craig as James Bond
Olga Kurylenko as Camille
Mathieu Amalric as Dominic Greene
Judi Dench as M
Giancarlo Giannini as Mathis
Gemma Arterton as Strawberry Fields
Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leiter
Directed by Marc Foster
Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, and some sexual content.
Running Time: 106 minutes
I did not like Casino Royale. I’m just going to open with that. I felt it wasn’t a Bond movie and had basically been a corruption of the movies to try and draw a bigger audience. But I went into this with an open mind, honestly expecting to be turned around and liking it.
As it can be derived from every scrap of evidence about the film, this is a direct sequel to Casino Royale, and when I say direct, I say if you haven’t watched it you will have no idea what is going on. This is not a standalone film.
As it’s a sequel to Casino Royale, the plot is predictable: Bond is trying to get revenge for the death of Vesper, but in the process of his search, he uncovers a large, powerful organization that he becomes intertwined with. The organization is known as QUANTUM and I suppose you could liken it to SPECTRE from the early movies, but only in the loosest sense. It is led or directed or invested in or something by Dominic Greene, played by Mathieu Amalric, and he is Bond’s nemesis for the movie.
You may have derived from the preceding paragraph a bit of uncertainty in the plot, and that’s because the plot is, to put it in the most appropriate word I can, godawful. It seems like it’s going fine while you’re watching it, as the action pulls the story along quickly and seemingly fluidly, but when the credits start rolling, you’ll start wondering how the hell anything connected to anything else. The story starts on revenge, switches to a more traditional Bond assassination-type story, and then reverts to revenge at the end. The middle part – the bulk of the movie – focuses on QUANTUM and Greene in particular, but never is anything really explained. It’s all very vague and you’re left to guessing what’s going on. Part of this may be their ‘big picture’ of turning QUANTUM into the main enemy of these new movies, but they could have at least explained better what was going on in this one.
And then there’s the ending, by far the worst part of the movie. I’m going to try and not tell you much so that you can weigh your own judgement, but I will say a few things. First, remember how Casino Royale seemed to end after Le Chiffre died and then they realized Bond couldn’t quit, so they threw in another half hour of action to keep it going? This one is the exact opposite. It just kind of ends; nothing is explained, what’s happening is left where it is, and that’s that. This is probably what leaves the sour taste in my mouth after seeing the movie; the ending basically unties the entire movie and makes it feel like you wasted almost two hours of your life for something they could have done in five minutes.
This is a Bond movie in name only once again, just like Casino Royale. It’s like they’re very, very slowly inching toward the old movies, as the title sequence actually has women in it, he shows a tiny bit of his seductive powers, and he says about one quip that could be taken as wit by someone who has never watched a Bond movie before. The title song, “Another Way to Die” by Alicia Keys and Jack White, also sounds more like a Bond theme song; it’s a harkening to the cheesy old songs, and it fits well.
But it’s not all bad. Daniel Craig is following the script and does what they wanted exceptionally well. He looks like a cold-hearted killer and he can balance both the action scenes with the mildly serious ones (except for one weird one with Camille near the end). Olga Kurylenko as Camille is a good fit, and she actually embodies the idea of revenge far better than Bond does. Judi Dench as M (referred to as ‘mum’ throughout the movie by most of the other agents) is what you expect and exactly like you’ve seen for the last five movies. Her and Bond’s relationship is actually one of the few remaining things that seem familiar in the movies; she doesn’t approve of how he works but she knows he’s the best. The best actor in the movie, though? Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leiter. The little he’s in the movie, he’s calm and cool, helps out Bond, and has the feel of a secret agent. He’s a better Bond than Bond, actually.
In the way of villains, we have Mathieu Amalric as the lead, playing Dominic Greene. With nothing special or sinister to his name besides business sense and bulgy eyes, his status as a villain rests entirely in his acting abilities. But just as Le Chiffre, he’s kind of an anti-villain; never do you feel threatened by him, half the time he looks scared for his life, and he can’t fight to save his life. Jesper Christensen reprises his role as Mr. White and is once again the only bad guy you actually feel like you might be scared of.
The action is the draw of this movie. With all this bad talk about the lack of a plot and mild acting, don’t let me detract the movie completely. There is double the action of Casino Royale and it’s glorious. There are chases by land, sea, and air; there are gunfights and brawls, explosions, everything. And it’s all great while you’re watching it. Especially the air fight; that was by far my favourite, despite part of it not making a lot of sense to me. Besides the usual movie magic, though, the action is great, over-the-top, gritty, and exactly what you want to see.
A few last random comments? The movie features a fast, quick-cut style through a lot of it, and while it suits the action scenes very well, anywhere else it feels like they’re leaving out huge chunks of movie, especially the end. The movie feels short, because it is short (it clocks in a hair over an hour and a quarter), and this is probably helped by the gratuitous amounts of fast-paced action, especially compared to the mind-numbing sequences of poker in Casino Royale. Part of the plot is environmentally themed, but just like the rest of the plot, only in the absolute loosest and vaguest sense. Also, ironically for me, a lot of similarities seemed to exist with Die Another Day, the movie that caused the switch to this new style of Bond. Finally, there are a couple of really, really weird scenes that seem completely out of place in a Bond movie, especially the fight scene that is run in parallel to the opera. I’m not sure what it reminded me, but it sure as hell wasn’t Bond.
The 411: Huge amounts of fast-paced and exciting action make this movie fun to watch, but an incredibly weak plot, a terrible ending, and the continued lack of anything even remotely Bond-like do irreparable damage. The reason I have to come down so hard is that the entire point of these new Bond movies seems to be to make a more serious Bond with a stronger story and feeling, and they just utterly failed with this one. This is just a big-budget action movie, nothing more.
A huge disappointent for me as well. I thought that even the action sequences didn`t add up with such terrible camera work
Posted By: Jeremy (Guest) on November 15, 2008 at 11:10 AM
This movie probably did one thing for me and that was missing the old James Bond films. They were what i grew up on (other then Indiana Jones) and this one was a huge disappointment for me.
I refused to watch Casino Royale but i felt i should watch this movie just to see if it could live up to the other.
I was wrong.
Rather waste of 8 dollars on tickets to me...
Posted By: Samish (Guest) on November 15, 2008 at 12:45 PM
While personally I find that Daniel Craig himself finally makes Bond something other than completely lame, the new films are basically just Jason Bourne movies with a different name.
Posted By: Frank (Guest) on November 15, 2008 at 01:26 PM
We all are going to have different opinions of a film, but the title does make sense.
Quantum is a number, portion or amount
Solace is comfort
The film is about seeking vengeance and getting over the past.
Quantum of Solace basically equates to Portion of Comfort or Peace
Dictionaries help a lot. Invest in one or find a website, since you're a writer of some degree.
Posted By: Remy (Guest) on November 15, 2008 at 08:42 PM
"Judi Dench as M (referred to as ‘mum’ throughout the movie by most of the other agents)"
I thought this at first too, but they're actually saying "ma'am".
Posted By: Big (Guest) on November 16, 2008 at 11:30 AM
Quote: VWe all are going to have different opinions of a film, but the title does make sense.
Quantum is a number, portion or amount
Solace is comfort
The film is about seeking vengeance and getting over the past.
Quantum of Solace basically equates to Portion of Comfort or Peace
Dictionaries help a lot. Invest in one or find a website, since you're a writer of some degree.
Posted By: Remy (Guest) on November 15, 2008 at 08:42 PM"
All true, and just to add, Ian Fleming, in context, meant the quantum of solace is the amount of empathy left in a relationship before the "love is over." Ever feel yourself falling OUT of love with someone? The dwindling feelings are your quantum of solace.
The title wasn't hard to figure out if you passed high school, but I will grant the wording is odd. But that's what makes it interesting, no?
On a side note, I almost unilaterally disagree with this review, as except for a couple of slight quibbles, I thought this was a worthy follow up to Casino Royale.
1. Director Marc Forster brings us the best acting ever seen in a 007 movie, but his independent film background style edits during the first couple of action sequences are a bit hard on the eyes.
2. The title song "Another Way To Die" is terrible for a Bond song, but is OK by itself. There really hasn't been a good theme since a-Ha's 1987 "The Living Daylights."
3. If you thought LeChiffre and Dominic Greene were "weak" villians, you'd be correct. That's the point. MI6/CIA/007 hasn't found Quantum's version of Blofeld yet, and when he does, do you honestly want a cheesy 1960s bad guy?
4. If you thought this movie's plot was "godawful", then I refer you to Will Helm's Scene Anatomy columns to figure out why a movie's plot is structured the way it is. Especially since QoS is NOT supposed to make every sense in the world: did you not catch the "Who the HELL are these people, Bond? And why do we know nothing about them?!?"
Posted By: Paul in Canada (Guest) on November 16, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Haha. Bond films get good and serious again but some people would rather have campy bullshit, ridiculous plots and Bond being a pretty boy with a gun. Casino Royale is the best Bond movie since Goldfinger. I like how Craig's Bond is much more believable due to his gritty take on the British agent. Yes, QoS is abit confusing if you haven't seen Royale, but aside from that it's a good film.
Posted By: Guest#1674 (Guest) on November 16, 2008 at 03:01 PM
Paul-
I'm not familiar with the novels...so thank you for adding the proper context of the title. Either way, the title does make sense.
I also think your short summing up of points is far better than this "reviewers" work.
Posted By: Remy (Guest) on November 16, 2008 at 03:41 PM
I'm really growing weary of the "it doesn't feel like a Bond movie" mentality. You know what "felt" like Bond movies? Octopussy... The Living Daylights... Never Say Never Again. I'll take a good movie over some intangible "feeling" any day.
Posted By: Dave (Guest) on November 16, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Best comment so far... seems some people would rather have a bad guy with an eye patch and metal teeth threatening to take over the world... "It doesn't feel like a Bond movie" = "I didn't like it cuz it wasn't about the Cold War"
Posted By: Guest#7817 (Guest) on November 17, 2008 at 12:36 AM
"I dont like James Bond anymore because he has blonde hair"
Jesus christ whatever happened to acting ability. The mentality of the anti-craigs is ridiculous
Posted By: Kev (Guest) on November 17, 2008 at 07:32 AM
"(referred to as ‘mum’ throughout the movie by most of the other agents)"
She's referred to as ma'am. They pronounce it mum.
Posted By: BK (Guest) on November 17, 2008 at 10:08 AM
@Paul in Canada:
George Sirois does Scene Anatomy. Will Helm does Misunderstood Masterpieces. :)
Posted By: Jeremy Thomas (Registered) on November 17, 2008 at 10:04 PM
go watch "Taken" with Liam Neeson: better than this and the last Bond.
Posted By: guy incognito (Guest) on November 18, 2008 at 01:37 PM
I have to say that I've always been a big fan of Bond (love Sean Connery, couldn't stand Roger Moore for some reason) and have to say that I really like the new Daniel Craig movies. Why you may ask? BEcause they're different to previous Bond movies. Apart from Goldeneye, Bosnan's movies sucked in my opinion and every single movie was the same, and not dissimilar from previous Dalton movies.
For me Casino Royale and Quantum kept the good parts of Bond (wit, women, actions) but made it darker, more realistic with much better acting. For me the plot of Quantum was a bit hard to follow but the action was great. Daniel Craig is a great Bond, just below Connery in the list of Best Bonds. I mean who doesn't love the scene when a bartender asks Bond in Casino Royale whether he would like his martini 'shaken or stirred' and Bond said 'do i look like i give a crap'
Posted By: AH (Guest) on November 18, 2008 at 08:31 PM
I will agree with 411 s take on the plot of quamtumn of solace . I went in expecting to see a straight up revenge story instead i got something completely different than casino royale. It wasnt all bad though , the plane scene was worth the wait . And whatever happened to the part when the bad guy says GOODBYE MR BOND , just when it looks like he is finally going to meet his doom . OVERALL the stroy confused me and i wanted him to wrap up his search for vespers killers but it doesnt feel as if anything was resolved
Posted By: r4 (Guest) on November 18, 2008 at 08:37 PM
I wanted to quit reading this after "I didn't like casino royale" but I didn't. Gave you a fair shot and listened to all these other people rant about how craig sucked. I liked it. I stopped caring about the bond movies when the stories to them became so predictable my 6 yr old son literally predicted it. Casino royale was a new change. It added depth to the character that no other bond tried.
Posted By: x-0816 (Guest) on November 19, 2008 at 01:17 PM
The movie was ok at best. The action scenes could have worked, if not for the shaky camera. The opera scene was the definition of cheese, and in the midst of all the grittiness it was doubly awful.
The new direction for Bond might be a bit on the refreshing side (though I've never been a big Bond guy anyway), but I liked it better when the movie was called Bourne.
Posted By: C (Guest) on November 19, 2008 at 09:01 PM
I don't rekon anything woudl please you Matthew. You did nt like Casino Royale? You must be a Bond hater.
Your view bias. The plot of the story may not be as strong as previous Bond movies.
You obviously dont like Daniel Craig also. As you said " mild acting". Get real mate. Start writing decent reviews scum
Posted By: Nick (Guest) on November 23, 2008 at 08:38 AM
A highly bias report.
You do not appreaciate the art or work of Ian Fleming.
You say you have an open mind. But you spend most your time complaining about mild acting and a poor plot.
If dont like Casino Royale and you must not like Dainel Craig.
I am excited for the next Bond movie. This movie did deliver!
You say it doesnt relate back to the old movies. Get with the times, in all of the first 20 Bond Movie's the same character has been potrayed. Its a good character, but at some point you have to see certain sides of Bond's personality.
Posted By: Jon (Guest) on November 23, 2008 at 08:46 AM
Well, I certainly do not wish to take away your right of opinion.. but you lost me at 'I didn't like Casino Royale.'
Posted By: Christopher Warrior (Guest) on November 25, 2008 at 10:38 AM
Without a doubt, Connery & Brosnan were the gold standard of Bond & my darkest days where during Moore’s farcical portrayal of our favorite 00. So I am pre-disposed not to accept Craig as a bone fide replacement. But even in both movies, Craig is not the problem, the producers & directors are. OK. Perhaps my last comments were really a review of Casino not having seen QoS. Now I have seen it and there are so many problems with it I do not know where to begin. All the chases are herky, jerky, shaky staccato film clips. You can never really see what is going on. This is contrary to the traditional Bond flick replete with detail. And if Craig is gritty, moody, mean & vindictive one can still see a path by which he becomes a cooler if not a cold, uber-professional agent with a dry, sardonic sense of humor. This Bond clearly appeals to a feminine perspective that escapes me. I understood him not becoming 'involved' with the other women in the 2 flicks as having high standards and was at least relieved to see his response to Fields as, what we would term a normal orientation! (The women seem to love that Bond does NOT 'hook up' with the main girl in either film and broods ceaselessly like a forlorn Hamlet for his unrequited lover from Casino). Even the opening chase, usually one of the best, is almost visually incomprehensible. Car chase, rooftop chase, sewer chase, apartment knife fight chase, boat chase, plane chase, Chase-Morgan, certainly they all were purloined from the Bourne genre but somehow Bourne's were more believable.
The opening graphics were not as bad as I feared, but were definitely not 007 quality. Far too much of Craig shooting his Walther PPK .380; (don't make me go into why that is a problem). We have grown accustomed to the sultry, sexual/sensual and awesome graphical intro to the Bond films. This one was not of the same caliber. Ditto on the theme song. It was not a good as past songs but I was fearing worse and it was actually passable relating somewhat to the general theme of the film. The barrel scene was placed at the end of the film. I prefer the beginning but in either case it should be presented with high quality graphics and punctuated with 007 theme song riffs. It was not.
Lots of chases. Most are barely watchable. I actually liked the reference to the traditional 13th century Italian Palio horse race in which the riders can use their longer wooden canes to encourage their steeds or discourage their opponents; and the actual event was supposed to be occurring outside of the chase area.
The knife fight was lame. How did the baddie die anyhow? Please tell me not with the little pair of cuticle scissors Bond had. And if the death blow was to the only wounded area shown, the left jugular, where did all the blood go as
Posted By: s (Guest) on January 02, 2009 at 05:23 PM
A disappointing movie. Sad that this was one of the only reviews on this site to get it right.
As for the franchise fans boy jumping to the defense of This awful move it isn't a matter of liking Daniel Craig or not. It is a matter of being good movie and a good Bond movie. Saying that some who doesn't like Casino Royale or Quantum isn't "Bond fan" is ass backwards. It is the other way around. Since Casino R the movies have been mimics of other action films and lost all of the charm of the previous Bond movies had.
Which incidentally was the charm that the Ian Fleming books had. Fleming would be outraged by these movie. He envisioned Cary Grant playing Bond and these last movies with a roughneck would have him steaming.
Posted By: Mark (Guest) on May 25, 2009 at 02:25 AM
Greeting. Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit.
I am from Africa and learning to speak English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "The congressional budget office cbo projects that if current laws do not change, federal spending on medicare and medicaid combined will grow from roughly percent of gdp today to almost percent by what this report describes as the intermediate term and to more than percent by what this report considers to be the long term."
With respect :-D, Ronan.
Posted By: Ronan (Guest) on July 03, 2009 at 09:44 PM
Greeting. Therefore search and see if there is not some place where you may invest your humanity.
I am from Tome and now teach English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Visa and mastercard have become a stock-block subway of merchant credit required also by merchant rules and problems, a mastercard prepaid."
Thank you very much :(. Knox.
Posted By: Knox (Guest) on September 04, 2009 at 06:14 PM
Sorry. The knowledge of the world is only to be acquired in the world, and not in a closet.
I am from Belize and too poorly know English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Beauty rose cosmetics, entering active trainer is seriously less than 30,000 attractive feminists."
With best wishes :o, Parson.
Posted By: Parson (Guest) on September 10, 2009 at 08:51 AM
Hi. It is better to have loved and lost than never to have lost at all. Help me! Need information about: Pale trading logistics has reported photo of eating strong fairs to children that are removing town, clothing or beauty of act brandfests to china.. I found only this - [URL=http://www.mulherecidadania.al.gov.br/Members/Elfcosmetics]beauty from the earth cosmetics[/URL]. Naomi has a sitcom in her ideal portal, beauty island cosmetics. Most of the clothing, sellers get commends more global that are a industry leaner extensively that the catalog dye is more regular. Thank you very much :-). Meredith from Germany.
Posted By: Meredith (Guest) on September 13, 2009 at 01:14 AM