Quantum of Solace...what did you think?

[LebowskiT1000]

I just saw Quantum of Solace today and I thought it was pretty good, but it could have been better. I think I liked Casino Royale a bit more and definitely liked most of the Brosnan films more.

I sure do miss 'Q' and the Bond gadgets, seems they are trying to get away from that sort of stuff (why, I'm not sure)...but neither of the Daniel Craig bond movies thus far have had 'Q' or any real interesting gadgets. Strange, now that I think about it.

Anyhow, what did you think?

[BondFan]

I have not seen it yet, but I plan to.

My daughter saw QoS and liked it. She also said that it was very similar in style to Casino Royal which she and I liked.

I will write my review after I see it.

[John]

The new Bond had alot of action in it . Yet it wasn't as long as the others . They cut 20 minutes off of Quantum Of Solace . Yes it was good , well not all Bond movies were excellent . Look at From Russia With Love . It was kind of slow , but Sean Connery loved making that Bond .
Yes I do miss Q , but I think he will be back in the next Bond .

[Iggy]

I've just seen it a second time and, well, I'm just not sure I can think of it as a Bond film. I loved CR, and the whole reboot idea was brilliantly done. And because it was a fresh start, you could get past the lack of the traditional Bondian elements like the gadgets and character because you expected to see them being introduced and their origins explained. So, for example, there was no gunbarrel logo opening because that was explained at the end of the teaser - when Bond shoots the guy down the barrel of his gun in the washroom. There's no 'shaken not stirred' line because Bond has just invented the drink and hasn't worked out his preferences yet. There is no Bond theme because Bond isn't yet the Bond we know, he hasn't 'earned' his theme yet.

I expected QoS to develop these ideas further and I'm hugely disapppointed that it didn't. Its almost like QoS is an afterthought to CR, the deleted scenes from the end, rather than a fully-fledged moving on of Bond's story. I see what they are trying to do character-wise, but there isn't enough time spent on character to really achieve this. They missed opportunities to explain the development of Bond's character, for example elements where the Bond theme kicks in to say 'this is another moment where Bond is becoming Bond', or which explain his development into a snob - in CR he was unrefined, Vesper bought him a Dinner Suit and he looked uncomfortable with it - in QoS he suddenly has developed a taste for expensive hotels - where did that come from? The gunbarrel logo which should have opened QoS having had its provenance explained in CR, is tacked on at the end like an afterthought.

Nice moments are the growing relationship between Bond and M and particularly between Bond and Leiter. The whole Mathis-Bond relationship could have been handled brilliantly, there was real chemistry between these two. Their friendship, growing out of hostility, could have been seen to really grow into a father-son Bond (like the relationships with Kerim Bey or Columbo) and Mathis's death should have been a complete bombshell to Bond. Daniel Craig made more out of these scenes than the scriptwriters and director gave him, but I can't help thinking that Martin Campbell would have had the audience in tears.

For me the producers mucked this one up. They looked too much at Bourne and for once tried to follow instead of lead. The whole thing looks hastily edited, the quick-cut edits of the action scenes reduce what looks like amazing work by the stunt team and second unit to epileptic fit-inducing nonsense. The car chase, boat chase and anti-climactic hotel scenes are confused and forgettable. The Tosca gunfight and the rope fight between Bond and Mitchell are, however, superb and give an annoying flavour of what might have been...

Commercially? I'm sure a huge success. A Bond film? I'm not sure. An opportunity wasted? Definitely.