The reviews are comin' fast and thick. Here's four out of five stars from News of the World:
At flipping last. It’s time for Part Two.
Yes, Daniel Craig’s James Bond is back, with piercing blue eyes, stubbly blond hair and a face so rough it could scour three-day-old grease off a dirty lasagne tray.
And this time it’s personal. Just like it was last time.
Amid the mound of fair-to-middling knee-jerk “first” reviews and grumbling by twerps, snobs and bloggers from www. noonereadsmywebsite.com, it’s vital to point out that Quantum of Solace is no Casino Royale.
But it’s still top-notch Bond—falling comfortably into the all-time top seven films of the series, alongside Casino, Russia, No, Eye, and two other Moore-free episodes of your own choosing.
This is Bond as it should be and needs to be in 2008. Gritty, sombre and brutal, with no gadgets, precious few quips, and eyebrows that remain firmly unraised at all times. Not to everyone’s taste, perhaps. But light years ahead of The Wacky Adventures of Grandpa Brosnan.
Quantum is merely the next bit in a sprawling multi-film plotline that began with Casino Royale.
The story picks up just about 15 minutes after the last one finished, and ends with enough loose ends to justify at least one more instalment—and hopefully two.
Bond’s still a bit narked about being betrayed by double agent and sexy mama Vesper Lynd in the last film. So he sets about tracking down the shadowy organisation that forced her to do it. Starting with a breakneck chase along the shores of Lake Garda with Bond firing a machine gun out the window of his Aston Martin (four-star rating in the bag already), Quantum makes no apologies to viewers who didn’t see or can’t remember Casino Royale.
Chaps, you may want to prepare a crib sheet for your other halves.
And ladies, may I warn you that NONE of these questions are acceptable mid-film: “Who’s he?”, “Why’s the old man been shot in the leg?”, “Who’s this Le Sheep everyone’s talking about?”, “Who’s Rene Mathis?” and, particularly, “When’s Daniel Craig going to take his shirt off?”.
Because the answers are: “Watch the last film”, “Watch the last film”, “Watch the last film”, “Watch the last film”, and “Shut up and watch this film”.
The trail leads Bond to Haiti, where he meets Camille (Olga Kurylenko), a rogue Bolivian agent on the trail of exiled General Medrano (Joaquin Cosio).
And with Camille comes Dominic Greene (brilliant Mathieu Amalric), a loaded, weaselly environmentalist who’s smoothing Medrano’s way to power for his own nefarious ends.
Quantum’s a film dominated by eye-popping set pieces. The incredible opening pursuit ends with one of the best first lines Bond’s ever had.
And it’s followed by another, even better, chase—a Bourne-style gallop across the tiled roofs of Siena that sees Bond take (and I’m using specific medical terminology here) an absolute fecking hammering.
Daniel’s said he wants to play Bond until his knees give out. Judging from the amount of punishment he takes here, I give him three weeks.
A superb bit of subterfuge at the opera and a hair-raising skydive also get the adrenaline pumping and demand to be seen on the big screen.
And holy moly, director Marc Forster knows how to make it all look good.
Disappointments? Admittedly, there are a few.
ONE: It’s just not in the same league as Casino. There’s no iconic moment on a par with THAT shower scene.
TWO: The “big finish” feels like more of a halfway stopping-off point. And worst of all . . .
THREE: The new Bond girls are total guff.
Following the impossibly sexy Eva Green was always going to be a tall order. But Olga Kurylenko doesn’t look like she can even be a*sed trying. And Gemma Arterton never quite loses the air of someone who’s won a competition.
But in the big picture? It doesn’t matter.
They’re bit-parters in Daniel Craig’s film and, once again, he knocks it 100 miles out of the park.
Don’t expect another Bond revolution. Do expect an absolute belter of a second chapter.
Some very nice reviews are emerging now - glad to hear from those who seem to get that this film isn't supposed to resemble an eyebrow-raised Moore escapade. My excitement levels are now firmly through the roof.
Haven't seen the new Bond yet but have found a brilliant interview with Daniel Craig at timeout.com/film. Loads of great questions from various Bond people, including John Cleese and the MI6 woman. Really funny.
Please note that Landesman is probably the worst film critic in Britain. But I do get the feeling that even the better reviews are being polite. There have been repeated comparisons to Jason Statham movies. They've been meant as an insult, but to me they are very promising.
Well I read Landesman's review and one thing is clear - he thinks Bond is about girls, gadgets, martinis and one-liners. His 'opinion' can be easily dismissed.
The meanest and leanest James Bond film yet, "Quantum of Solace" is a breathless splash of high-speed action that hurtles from one reckless chase to another.
There's not much solace and few words as the British secret agent exercises his license to kill in dispatching one bad guy after another in the attempt to avenge the death of the lover who died two years ago in "Casino Royale," Daniel Craig's acclaimed Bond bow.
Fans of that box office smash and the earlier films might be disappointed that the new film allows hardly any flourishes of style and character in the 007 tradition, but moviegoers seeking an adrenaline rush will be well pleased. Clocking in at 105 minutes -- almost 40 minutes shorter than the bloated "Casino Royale" -- the film should do bristling business around the world. The Sony Pictures release opens Friday in the U.K., and November 14 in North America.
So much of the movie comprises furious pursuits in boats, planes automobiles that director Marc Forster owes huge thanks to his talented technical crew. Second unit director Dan Bradley and stunt coordinator Gary Powell, both "Bourne" veterans, must take a large chunk of the credit for all the thrilling encounters that leave credibility in the dust.
Forster's regular cinematographer, Robert Schaefer, and Oscar-winning production designer Dennis Gassner ("Bugsy") contribute fine work, and the intricate assembly by editors Matt Chesse and Richard Pearson is staggeringly effective. A gunfight cut against a lavish performance of "Tosca" is an action triumph.
Jack White's title song passes without notice, but composer David Arnold provides a top-flight action score, keeping the familiar themes to a minimum.
Craig looks incredibly fit, and his manner suggests someone capable of surviving everything that's thrown at him. This Bond is more invincible than ever and shares with Jason Bourne and the kite runner the unerring ability to know exactly where the object of his chase will end up.
Judi Dench has a few good scenes tearing a strip off her favorite agent, and Olga Kurylenko sees serious action of her own, which she renders in high style. Gemma Arterton, however, is a mere bedroom dalliance, and Mathieu Amalric ("The Diving Bell and the Butterfly") tends to let his character's madness show too much with bulging eyes, one of which threatens to start blinking at any moment.
There are the usual lavish locales, and the film is as efficient as its supercomputers and high-powered weaponry and as sleek as the glamorous settings where Bond catches his breath. There is a danger in this version of Ian Fleming's hero, however. A killer in the movies needs something redeeming about him. Bourne had presumed innocence, and Sean Connery's Bond, while nasty, had ironic wit. Craig's humorless Bond is in danger of becoming simply a very well-dressed but murderous thug.
Vox clamantis in deserto
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
I think that the only reason that the film has been getting mostly 3-star ratings is because CR set the bar too high.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
I think that the only reason that the film has been getting mostly 3-star ratings is because CR set the bar too high.
I agree, Sweepy. CR was, quite probably, the most critically-acclaimed Bond film of all time---certainly in the Modern Era. That QoS is being needled for not being 'quite there' should hardly be a shock to anyone. What's encouraging is that Craig continues to receive very positive notices.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Man, it's getting panned in everything I happen to read.....no Bond music, no gadgets, no one liners, no humor, no drama and no characterisation.....ah, who cares, I'm still gonna see it!
Another "Craig's great and it's a great action flick, but there's no Bond flair", lamenting fromThe Sunday Herald. The "Bourne" word is dragged up again.
Licensed to show his true feelings
FILM REVIEW: By Demetrios Matheou
Quantum of Solace (12A)
Director: Marc Forster
3/5
AS A kid in the 1970s, when I started to watch James Bond movies, it was during the first serious changing of the guard, between Connery and Moore. And even though the greatest Bonds were behind me (Dr No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger) each one of those early 1970s films had features that were indelibly "Bond". Connery racing across the lunar film set in Diamonds Are Forever, that film's memorably creepy villains Mr Kidd and Mr Wint, the poignant swimming pool murder of the expendable Bond girl, Plenty O'Toole (oh, how we miss those names), and Shirley Bassey's thrilling theme tune; Paul McCartney's own great theme to Live And Let Die, and the exploding baddie Mr Big; Christopher's Lee's triple-nippled and dastardly Scaramanga and his dwarfish accomplice Nick Nack, in The Man With The Golden Gun.
More than the action or locations (the producers should recognise the diminishing returns of jet-setting), it was the music, the villains, the startling sadism behind the killing of so many beautiful women, Q and his gadgets, and the charisma of the star that made a 007 movie stay with you. Not necessarily all in the one movie, but there was always something.
The point of my trip down memory lane is this. In recent years, the Bond producers have been obsessed with changing Bond: first they felt they needed to adapt their character to a world without the Cold War, and in which women were not doormats; then, it was because the Jason Bourne movies had raised the bar for espionage thrillers, adding the weight of well-drawn characters to the action spectacle. With Daniel Craig's first outing as 007, Casino Royale, they seemed to strike the perfect new balance: the film was a lean, mean, modern Bond, both different and - with its luscious femme fatale Vesper Lynd and the many tuxedoed appearances at the card tables - familiar.
Quantum Of Solace, however, is a step too far. An hour after the event, the women, and the villains are already starting to fade; the theme tune didn't even enter my mind, so couldn't leave it; there was no Q, no assistant Q, no gadgets. I'm sitting here recalling the chubby Goldfinger sucked out of his aircraft, Rosa Klebb desperately lunging at Bond with her poisoned shoe: daft as a brush, of course, but the je ne sais quoi of the 007 experience. Memories. I have just seen a very good film. But it's not a Bond film. And that feels strange.
It starts where Casino Royale left off, with Bond having captured the mysterious Mr White, who holds the key to Vesper's death: Vesper whom he loved, but refuses to mourn because he thinks she betrayed him. Director Marc Forster launches immediately into the first of many fabulous action sequences, this one a brutal, raw car chase on a twisting mountain road, Bond having no cigarette-lighter- cum-rocket-launcher to get him out of the fix, relying on nifty driving and one well-timed burst of his gun. It's soon followed by a rooftop pursuit in Siena (not as good as the Tangier scene in The Bourne Ultimatum, which it evokes, but no matter) and a speedboat chase that is full of back-to-basics stunt invention.
In the midst of these, White has escaped, a mole is discovered in M16, and M (Judi Dench) has been unusually fazed by the notion that there is a vast criminal organisation about which she knows nothing and that her top gun is being driven by vengeance rather than duty. Nevertheless, she lets Bond off the leash. And in his customary defiance of jet lag, cash flow and the lack of a travel iron, he travels to Haiti, Austria and Bolivia in pursuit of answers and payback.
The scenario involves a seemingly philanthropic conservationist, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Almaric), who is actually planning to stage a Bolivian coup, in league with the CIA. Meanwhile Greene's livewire lover Camille (Olga Kurylenko) is harbouring her own desire for revenge, her plans dovetailing with Bond's. 007 seeks the aid of the man he wrongly thought a traitor in the earlier film, Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini), and leads naïve British agent Fields (Gemma Arterton) towards his bed and an early bath.
The most glaring difference between the Bonds of old and the Bourne films was between fantasy, and a semblance of reality. In the Bournes, the consequences - of violence, betrayal, loss - are always felt; the death of Bourne's lover Marie hangs over two entire films. With 007, a succession of lovers and colleagues, as well as enemies, are despatched, with only a quip to mark their passing.
At the same time, you could never say of a Bond film that it had a theme. But with Quantum Of Solace, Forster, his writers and star change all that. Craig, acting his socks off, portrays Bond as a man completely undone by the combination of loss and disillusion, unaware of the number of people he is needlessly terminating to combat his feelings ("If you could avoid killing a possible lead," pleads M, "it would be deeply appreciated"), and who needs to address the sort of human issues that the wafer-thin character has never before faced. A turning point for Bond, as he cradles a dying colleague, is incredibly atypical of the franchise, and surprisingly moving.
This film, then, does have themes: of loss and, particularly, trust. M struggles to trust Bond or, indeed, anyone in her organisation; Bond finds that the only person he can trust, Mathis, is a man he previously had tortured as a traitor; the agent has to come to terms with the honour of the dead Vesper, before he can ever move on. These strands of character development permeate the film as, for the first time, the villains are pushed to the margins by honourable characters, battling for understanding.
Forster is an interesting choice as director, being known not for action movies, but diverse, decidedly art house fare: Monsters Ball, Finding Neverland, The Kite Flyer. He does well, imbuing the action with muscle and panache, orchestrating an excellent set-piece - smart, wry, exciting - in an opera house, and handling his actors and those themes very well.
Yet for all the improvements, something essential is missing. At one point Bond is told: "There is something horribly efficient about you." This could be said of the film itself. Revealingly, in the single moment that Forster falters, he signals the strangely schizophrenic character of his enterprise. And it involves one of those facets that first struck me as a youth: the expendable Bond girl. Here, the director tries to pay homage to the gold-painted Shirley Eaton in Goldfinger: this is, for Quantum Of Solace, the Bond moment, the piece of magic that will uphold the legend. But for some reason his camera won't keep still, it is shy of the dead woman, it lacks - dare one say it - the sadistic relish of old, and the glee in the theatrical. It's as if Forster wants to protect the integrity of his modern spy movie. While doing so, he's buried the Bond, James Bond that we know and love.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
edited October 2008
It's interesting---the character arc Eon seem to be charting for their man is apparently more gradual than what many critics (or I) had anticipated. If CR was the action, QoS has come off (at least in the advance reviews) as the reaction...rather than Bond being fully returned to the 'status quo' of the long-established 007, Forster and Craig have apparently engineered a picture in which Bond's processing of what happened to him in CR---the betrayal by, and death of, Vesper---is still an ongoing issue as the story unfolds; closure isn't an easy thing for our hero to achieve, and it might be more complex than just a simple quest for vengeance, as was attempted with LTK.
If some reviews are to be believed, this evolution takes place in very subtle ways. I've noticed a couple of them myself, in the clips I've seen: Bond's reaction to Mathis taking about Vesper 'dying for him,' and Bond's denial of feeling when discussing Vesper with M.
In short, Forster---and, by extension, Eon and Craig, in complicating the weave of 007's tapestry---have deliberately decided to make us wait just a bit longer for a 'business as usual' James Bond.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,585Chief of Staff
In short, Forster---and, by extension, Eon and Craig---have deliberately decided to make us wait just a bit longer for a 'business as usual' James Bond...and if some reviews are to be believed, this evolution takes place in very subtle ways. I've notice a couple of them in the clips I've seen---Bond's reaction to Mathis taking about Vesper 'dying for him,' and Bond's denial of feeling when discussing Vesper with M.
Which I'm all for...you don't get over someone (especially someone who meant so much to Bond as Vesper did, and then betrayed him the way she did) that quickly...it's got to hurt for a lot longer...hopefully through the next picture too...it's good to see Bond evolve...not just turn up as the finished article.
True, but then it's not really Ian Fleming's Bond exactly. It's more a kind of McGuffin because they don't have so many external ideas. Then again Fleming turned in on Bond around OHMSS and YOLT - but that marked the decadence of the character, the final arc, not the beginning.
ITV's News At Ten started their own Bourne comparisons last night.
Somehow that numbskull Nina Nana got an interview with DC and spent the whole time grilling him about the lack of gadgets, Bond girl frolics and one-liners.
Firstly Nina, DC didn't write the script, which I wish he'd have told her. And secondly, stop bandwagon jumping. I'd be amazed if the snob had ever even seen a Bourne film to compare QoS to.
Instead DC was remarkably restrained.
He said that losing someone like Vesper, someone Bond had loved, was tough and he wouldn't go romping with women 'willy nilly' if he was hurting so bad.
He also said forcing lines like 'Bond, James Bond' into the film would have felt wrong and needless.
He did admit the story arc was completely fulfilled now and hinted there would be more gadgets and 'more familar Bondian things' in the next film.
Still no mention of the misplaced gunbarrel though.
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet but Graham Rye's review of QOS is now up. Beware, this is a VERY detailed review of the film so avoid altogether or skim read if you want to dodge too many spoilers. He gives the film 1 out of 10 in comparison to Casino Royale and admits to clock watching near the end.
Wow. 1 out of 10. That review could turn off the most devoted fan. Pringle was right, it is PACKED with spoilers...in fact, every scene and most of the dialogue is broken down for your reading (dis)pleasure. My advice? Don't read the 007magazine review. I wish I hadn't:#
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
edited October 2008
1 out of 10. My goodness. And he liked CR...
For CR haters, this one must be a Negative 5!
)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
No need to rub it in Loeff...we're all friends here.;)
Not rubbing anything in ?:) I just don't buy the review.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I know...I was just kidding. I agree with you-a negative 5 review is probably about right. That review left me a little woozy.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
edited October 2008
I thought AVTAK was really awful...with my least favourite Bond actor and a metric ton of problems...but I'd still give it at least a 3 on a scale of 10...
Giving QoS a '1' seems hyperbolic in the extreme. However, if---after seeing the film, in just over two weeks' time---I agree, I'll say I was wrong...and then go find a place to vomit
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Well, I already got my QOS tickets, so I'm there regardless of reviews. It is hard to believe reviews that are either "the best movie ever" or "the worst movie ever".
Graham Rye is a renowned sourpuss, mind you his slating of DAD was spot on if I recall. I'm not sure he really likes the Bond films of late, I think he's OD'd on them in his lifetime.
Haven't see the film yet -- still two weeks away in the U.S. -- but from what's in some of the clips, I'm in agreement with the criticism of the frenetic editing. I can also see how critics who grew up in the Moore-Brosnan era would yearn for formula, since that's largely what those films were about. I don't mean that as an insult, but it's obvious that for a couple decades not much had changed. So, I'm buoyed that this film is eschewing going right into formula mode. In addition, retro-loving Gen-Y may have very different expectations than their middle-aged and older predecessors.
What troubles me, though, is the constant reiteration that QoS lacks much of a plot . . . that could be the result of Forster's annoying insistence on making a shorter Bond, with important script moments being cut to make way for the briefer running time. Bond films deserve to be savored, but I'm afraid this will seem more like fastfood in that regard.
Jonathan Ross gave the film a glowing review on Film 2009 last night. He said it wasn't as good as CR but was still well worth seeing and that DC is the man.
There were yet more extracts from the film itself, plus interviews with DC, Forster, MG Wilson and Almarac.
Ross asked DC if Bond still smoked and DC said: "No, nobody does anymore..."
He looked genuinely disappointed he couldn't dabble in a Chesterfield or two like Fleming's Bond, as he revealed he enjoys a cigar when he's relaxing
Don't get me wrong---I'm sure many critics are lovely people (despite the ubiquitous lack of supporting evidence 8-) )---but sometimes it's good to see an articulate James Bond Fan (who isn't necessarily looking to score points by hinting at how superior he is to the material at hand) review a James Bond Film...Beware spoilers! (You Have Been Warned) :v
My most sincere congratulations to Zorin Industries {[]
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Comments
At flipping last. It’s time for Part Two.
Yes, Daniel Craig’s James Bond is back, with piercing blue eyes, stubbly blond hair and a face so rough it could scour three-day-old grease off a dirty lasagne tray.
And this time it’s personal. Just like it was last time.
Amid the mound of fair-to-middling knee-jerk “first” reviews and grumbling by twerps, snobs and bloggers from www. noonereadsmywebsite.com, it’s vital to point out that Quantum of Solace is no Casino Royale.
But it’s still top-notch Bond—falling comfortably into the all-time top seven films of the series, alongside Casino, Russia, No, Eye, and two other Moore-free episodes of your own choosing.
This is Bond as it should be and needs to be in 2008. Gritty, sombre and brutal, with no gadgets, precious few quips, and eyebrows that remain firmly unraised at all times. Not to everyone’s taste, perhaps. But light years ahead of The Wacky Adventures of Grandpa Brosnan.
Quantum is merely the next bit in a sprawling multi-film plotline that began with Casino Royale.
The story picks up just about 15 minutes after the last one finished, and ends with enough loose ends to justify at least one more instalment—and hopefully two.
Bond’s still a bit narked about being betrayed by double agent and sexy mama Vesper Lynd in the last film. So he sets about tracking down the shadowy organisation that forced her to do it. Starting with a breakneck chase along the shores of Lake Garda with Bond firing a machine gun out the window of his Aston Martin (four-star rating in the bag already), Quantum makes no apologies to viewers who didn’t see or can’t remember Casino Royale.
Chaps, you may want to prepare a crib sheet for your other halves.
And ladies, may I warn you that NONE of these questions are acceptable mid-film: “Who’s he?”, “Why’s the old man been shot in the leg?”, “Who’s this Le Sheep everyone’s talking about?”, “Who’s Rene Mathis?” and, particularly, “When’s Daniel Craig going to take his shirt off?”.
Because the answers are: “Watch the last film”, “Watch the last film”, “Watch the last film”, “Watch the last film”, and “Shut up and watch this film”.
The trail leads Bond to Haiti, where he meets Camille (Olga Kurylenko), a rogue Bolivian agent on the trail of exiled General Medrano (Joaquin Cosio).
And with Camille comes Dominic Greene (brilliant Mathieu Amalric), a loaded, weaselly environmentalist who’s smoothing Medrano’s way to power for his own nefarious ends.
Quantum’s a film dominated by eye-popping set pieces. The incredible opening pursuit ends with one of the best first lines Bond’s ever had.
And it’s followed by another, even better, chase—a Bourne-style gallop across the tiled roofs of Siena that sees Bond take (and I’m using specific medical terminology here) an absolute fecking hammering.
Daniel’s said he wants to play Bond until his knees give out. Judging from the amount of punishment he takes here, I give him three weeks.
A superb bit of subterfuge at the opera and a hair-raising skydive also get the adrenaline pumping and demand to be seen on the big screen.
And holy moly, director Marc Forster knows how to make it all look good.
Disappointments? Admittedly, there are a few.
ONE: It’s just not in the same league as Casino. There’s no iconic moment on a par with THAT shower scene.
TWO: The “big finish” feels like more of a halfway stopping-off point. And worst of all . . .
THREE: The new Bond girls are total guff.
Following the impossibly sexy Eva Green was always going to be a tall order. But Olga Kurylenko doesn’t look like she can even be a*sed trying. And Gemma Arterton never quite loses the air of someone who’s won a competition.
But in the big picture? It doesn’t matter.
They’re bit-parters in Daniel Craig’s film and, once again, he knocks it 100 miles out of the park.
Don’t expect another Bond revolution. Do expect an absolute belter of a second chapter.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article5001623.ece
Please note that Landesman is probably the worst film critic in Britain. But I do get the feeling that even the better reviews are being polite. There have been repeated comparisons to Jason Statham movies. They've been meant as an insult, but to me they are very promising.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
James Bond Cuts to the Chase in Fast-Paced Sequel
By Ray Bennett
The meanest and leanest James Bond film yet, "Quantum of Solace" is a breathless splash of high-speed action that hurtles from one reckless chase to another.
There's not much solace and few words as the British secret agent exercises his license to kill in dispatching one bad guy after another in the attempt to avenge the death of the lover who died two years ago in "Casino Royale," Daniel Craig's acclaimed Bond bow.
Fans of that box office smash and the earlier films might be disappointed that the new film allows hardly any flourishes of style and character in the 007 tradition, but moviegoers seeking an adrenaline rush will be well pleased. Clocking in at 105 minutes -- almost 40 minutes shorter than the bloated "Casino Royale" -- the film should do bristling business around the world. The Sony Pictures release opens Friday in the U.K., and November 14 in North America.
So much of the movie comprises furious pursuits in boats, planes automobiles that director Marc Forster owes huge thanks to his talented technical crew. Second unit director Dan Bradley and stunt coordinator Gary Powell, both "Bourne" veterans, must take a large chunk of the credit for all the thrilling encounters that leave credibility in the dust.
Forster's regular cinematographer, Robert Schaefer, and Oscar-winning production designer Dennis Gassner ("Bugsy") contribute fine work, and the intricate assembly by editors Matt Chesse and Richard Pearson is staggeringly effective. A gunfight cut against a lavish performance of "Tosca" is an action triumph.
Jack White's title song passes without notice, but composer David Arnold provides a top-flight action score, keeping the familiar themes to a minimum.
Craig looks incredibly fit, and his manner suggests someone capable of surviving everything that's thrown at him. This Bond is more invincible than ever and shares with Jason Bourne and the kite runner the unerring ability to know exactly where the object of his chase will end up.
Judi Dench has a few good scenes tearing a strip off her favorite agent, and Olga Kurylenko sees serious action of her own, which she renders in high style. Gemma Arterton, however, is a mere bedroom dalliance, and Mathieu Amalric ("The Diving Bell and the Butterfly") tends to let his character's madness show too much with bulging eyes, one of which threatens to start blinking at any moment.
There are the usual lavish locales, and the film is as efficient as its supercomputers and high-powered weaponry and as sleek as the glamorous settings where Bond catches his breath. There is a danger in this version of Ian Fleming's hero, however. A killer in the movies needs something redeeming about him. Bourne had presumed innocence, and Sean Connery's Bond, while nasty, had ironic wit. Craig's humorless Bond is in danger of becoming simply a very well-dressed but murderous thug.
I agree, Sweepy. CR was, quite probably, the most critically-acclaimed Bond film of all time---certainly in the Modern Era. That QoS is being needled for not being 'quite there' should hardly be a shock to anyone. What's encouraging is that Craig continues to receive very positive notices.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
'Job's done, the bitch is dead!'
Perhaps the follow up should have been a more thoughtful, separate mission, much like Fleming wrote with Live and Let Die.
I'm reserving judgement until I've seen the film, though.
Licensed to show his true feelings
FILM REVIEW: By Demetrios Matheou
Quantum of Solace (12A)
Director: Marc Forster
3/5
AS A kid in the 1970s, when I started to watch James Bond movies, it was during the first serious changing of the guard, between Connery and Moore. And even though the greatest Bonds were behind me (Dr No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger) each one of those early 1970s films had features that were indelibly "Bond". Connery racing across the lunar film set in Diamonds Are Forever, that film's memorably creepy villains Mr Kidd and Mr Wint, the poignant swimming pool murder of the expendable Bond girl, Plenty O'Toole (oh, how we miss those names), and Shirley Bassey's thrilling theme tune; Paul McCartney's own great theme to Live And Let Die, and the exploding baddie Mr Big; Christopher's Lee's triple-nippled and dastardly Scaramanga and his dwarfish accomplice Nick Nack, in The Man With The Golden Gun.
More than the action or locations (the producers should recognise the diminishing returns of jet-setting), it was the music, the villains, the startling sadism behind the killing of so many beautiful women, Q and his gadgets, and the charisma of the star that made a 007 movie stay with you. Not necessarily all in the one movie, but there was always something.
The point of my trip down memory lane is this. In recent years, the Bond producers have been obsessed with changing Bond: first they felt they needed to adapt their character to a world without the Cold War, and in which women were not doormats; then, it was because the Jason Bourne movies had raised the bar for espionage thrillers, adding the weight of well-drawn characters to the action spectacle. With Daniel Craig's first outing as 007, Casino Royale, they seemed to strike the perfect new balance: the film was a lean, mean, modern Bond, both different and - with its luscious femme fatale Vesper Lynd and the many tuxedoed appearances at the card tables - familiar.
Quantum Of Solace, however, is a step too far. An hour after the event, the women, and the villains are already starting to fade; the theme tune didn't even enter my mind, so couldn't leave it; there was no Q, no assistant Q, no gadgets. I'm sitting here recalling the chubby Goldfinger sucked out of his aircraft, Rosa Klebb desperately lunging at Bond with her poisoned shoe: daft as a brush, of course, but the je ne sais quoi of the 007 experience. Memories. I have just seen a very good film. But it's not a Bond film. And that feels strange.
It starts where Casino Royale left off, with Bond having captured the mysterious Mr White, who holds the key to Vesper's death: Vesper whom he loved, but refuses to mourn because he thinks she betrayed him. Director Marc Forster launches immediately into the first of many fabulous action sequences, this one a brutal, raw car chase on a twisting mountain road, Bond having no cigarette-lighter- cum-rocket-launcher to get him out of the fix, relying on nifty driving and one well-timed burst of his gun. It's soon followed by a rooftop pursuit in Siena (not as good as the Tangier scene in The Bourne Ultimatum, which it evokes, but no matter) and a speedboat chase that is full of back-to-basics stunt invention.
In the midst of these, White has escaped, a mole is discovered in M16, and M (Judi Dench) has been unusually fazed by the notion that there is a vast criminal organisation about which she knows nothing and that her top gun is being driven by vengeance rather than duty. Nevertheless, she lets Bond off the leash. And in his customary defiance of jet lag, cash flow and the lack of a travel iron, he travels to Haiti, Austria and Bolivia in pursuit of answers and payback.
The scenario involves a seemingly philanthropic conservationist, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Almaric), who is actually planning to stage a Bolivian coup, in league with the CIA. Meanwhile Greene's livewire lover Camille (Olga Kurylenko) is harbouring her own desire for revenge, her plans dovetailing with Bond's. 007 seeks the aid of the man he wrongly thought a traitor in the earlier film, Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini), and leads naïve British agent Fields (Gemma Arterton) towards his bed and an early bath.
The most glaring difference between the Bonds of old and the Bourne films was between fantasy, and a semblance of reality. In the Bournes, the consequences - of violence, betrayal, loss - are always felt; the death of Bourne's lover Marie hangs over two entire films. With 007, a succession of lovers and colleagues, as well as enemies, are despatched, with only a quip to mark their passing.
At the same time, you could never say of a Bond film that it had a theme. But with Quantum Of Solace, Forster, his writers and star change all that. Craig, acting his socks off, portrays Bond as a man completely undone by the combination of loss and disillusion, unaware of the number of people he is needlessly terminating to combat his feelings ("If you could avoid killing a possible lead," pleads M, "it would be deeply appreciated"), and who needs to address the sort of human issues that the wafer-thin character has never before faced. A turning point for Bond, as he cradles a dying colleague, is incredibly atypical of the franchise, and surprisingly moving.
This film, then, does have themes: of loss and, particularly, trust. M struggles to trust Bond or, indeed, anyone in her organisation; Bond finds that the only person he can trust, Mathis, is a man he previously had tortured as a traitor; the agent has to come to terms with the honour of the dead Vesper, before he can ever move on. These strands of character development permeate the film as, for the first time, the villains are pushed to the margins by honourable characters, battling for understanding.
Forster is an interesting choice as director, being known not for action movies, but diverse, decidedly art house fare: Monsters Ball, Finding Neverland, The Kite Flyer. He does well, imbuing the action with muscle and panache, orchestrating an excellent set-piece - smart, wry, exciting - in an opera house, and handling his actors and those themes very well.
Yet for all the improvements, something essential is missing. At one point Bond is told: "There is something horribly efficient about you." This could be said of the film itself. Revealingly, in the single moment that Forster falters, he signals the strangely schizophrenic character of his enterprise. And it involves one of those facets that first struck me as a youth: the expendable Bond girl. Here, the director tries to pay homage to the gold-painted Shirley Eaton in Goldfinger: this is, for Quantum Of Solace, the Bond moment, the piece of magic that will uphold the legend. But for some reason his camera won't keep still, it is shy of the dead woman, it lacks - dare one say it - the sadistic relish of old, and the glee in the theatrical. It's as if Forster wants to protect the integrity of his modern spy movie. While doing so, he's buried the Bond, James Bond that we know and love.
If some reviews are to be believed, this evolution takes place in very subtle ways. I've noticed a couple of them myself, in the clips I've seen: Bond's reaction to Mathis taking about Vesper 'dying for him,' and Bond's denial of feeling when discussing Vesper with M.
In short, Forster---and, by extension, Eon and Craig, in complicating the weave of 007's tapestry---have deliberately decided to make us wait just a bit longer for a 'business as usual' James Bond.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Which I'm all for...you don't get over someone (especially someone who meant so much to Bond as Vesper did, and then betrayed him the way she did) that quickly...it's got to hurt for a lot longer...hopefully through the next picture too...it's good to see Bond evolve...not just turn up as the finished article.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Somehow that numbskull Nina Nana got an interview with DC and spent the whole time grilling him about the lack of gadgets, Bond girl frolics and one-liners.
Firstly Nina, DC didn't write the script, which I wish he'd have told her. And secondly, stop bandwagon jumping. I'd be amazed if the snob had ever even seen a Bourne film to compare QoS to.
Instead DC was remarkably restrained.
He said that losing someone like Vesper, someone Bond had loved, was tough and he wouldn't go romping with women 'willy nilly' if he was hurting so bad.
He also said forcing lines like 'Bond, James Bond' into the film would have felt wrong and needless.
He did admit the story arc was completely fulfilled now and hinted there would be more gadgets and 'more familar Bondian things' in the next film.
Still no mention of the misplaced gunbarrel though.
http://www.007magazine.co.uk/bond22/bond_22_review.htm
1 out of 10. My goodness. And he liked CR...
For CR haters, this one must be a Negative 5!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Not rubbing anything in ?:) I just don't buy the review.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Giving QoS a '1' seems hyperbolic in the extreme. However, if---after seeing the film, in just over two weeks' time---I agree, I'll say I was wrong...and then go find a place to vomit
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Roger Moore 1927-2017
What troubles me, though, is the constant reiteration that QoS lacks much of a plot . . . that could be the result of Forster's annoying insistence on making a shorter Bond, with important script moments being cut to make way for the briefer running time. Bond films deserve to be savored, but I'm afraid this will seem more like fastfood in that regard.
There were yet more extracts from the film itself, plus interviews with DC, Forster, MG Wilson and Almarac.
Ross asked DC if Bond still smoked and DC said: "No, nobody does anymore..."
He looked genuinely disappointed he couldn't dabble in a Chesterfield or two like Fleming's Bond, as he revealed he enjoys a cigar when he's relaxing
It will be on BBCi soon for those who missed it.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
http://debrief.commanderbond.net/index.php?showtopic=50535
...is a review :007)
Don't get me wrong---I'm sure many critics are lovely people (despite the ubiquitous lack of supporting evidence 8-) )---but sometimes it's good to see an articulate James Bond Fan (who isn't necessarily looking to score points by hinting at how superior he is to the material at hand) review a James Bond Film...Beware spoilers! (You Have Been Warned) :v
My most sincere congratulations to Zorin Industries {[]
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM