batester2005Dudley, West Mids, UKPosts: 155MI6 Agent
I saw the film last night (which was kind of ruined because id already completed the computer game and spoilt the story for myself) and i think anyone who watches the film through their own eyes instead of Sean Connery kiss ass glasses will like it. i thought that it was an excellent film. what people need to realise is that this new bond is what it says, a new bond. its not meant to be a gadget fest. how many mobile phones have you owned that can control a car or a car that is invisible. the new bond is a realistic bond who has to outwit opponents with his skill rather than gadgets. Bond only kills the bad guys in the film anyway, if u have seen it u can verify that for me. MI6 were told that he'd killed people when he actually hadnt.
watch the film and forget the old ones, then you'll appreciate it.
I thought I would be sitting here writing a negative review, but no, I'm delighted to say that QoS delivers. Everybody on this site has their own idea of what a Bond film should be, and this one is mine. I'm aware that some people have already expressed their dislike and they're entitled to their opinion. If you have no time for OHMSS, or the Dalton films, or CR, then you're not going to be fond of QoS.
However, I haven't enjoyed a new Bond film this much since LTK, Craig is excellent and I'm baffled by the claims in some press reviews that he is just a killing machine. There's a lot going on behind those blue eyes and he brings real depth to scenes such as
Mathis dying
. As for the moment when he tells a distraught Camille
to close her eyes,
I swear every woman in the place swooned and probably shut their eyes as well. Both Bond girls are stunning. Arterton's prim Agent Fields has a naughty side, which is quickly unlocked by 007, very quickly, a pleasant surprise in these PC times. As for Olga, her Camille is wounded, but defiant, and a superb addition to the canon. I'm mystified by claims that there is no humour in QoS. I found it to be quite witty, And it takes its themes of loss and vengeance seriously, but not so much that it distracts from the action, which is intense, although enough with the over-editing already.
As for the gun-barrel, well there's two of them.
the first appears at the end of the PTS and morphs into the opening credits, and the traditional gun-barrel appears at the end
and it so good to see Craig finally making that walk. Some of you are going to hate this film. Others, Loeff, HH, your film of the year will be arriving soon. It's worth waiting for.
A fantastic review JD - I agree with every word. Superbly written and thanks for emphasising the humour, style and humanity in Quantum of Solace which appears to have been missed by the professional viewers.
A fantastic review JD - I agree with every word. Superbly written and thanks for emphasising the humour, style and humanity in Quantum of Solace which appears to have been missed by the professional viewers.
{[] Lazenby880. I'm just so happy to be writing positives. There's been so much bad press lately, that I thought the film must be a dud. To find out that it's one of the best films of the year was a delight. There was one flaw though. That Spanish woman was the modern equivalent of the double-taking pigeon. )
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,917Chief of Staff
John Drake, Lazenby; great to read opinions similar to mine concerning this wonderful film. I love film, I love great film and I can honestly say that this was simply stunning.
Its been 24 hours since I left the cinema and I just can't stop thinking about it. As I mentioned before the fire fight through the restaurant was probably one of the most wonderful pieces of cinematography I have had the pleasure to watch.
When people complain that they want their 'old' Bond back then remind them of Roger fighting off enemies with tennis rackets and impersonating Tarzan.
Of Pierce in his invisible car, and kite surfing on the worst CGI ocean I have ever witnessed.
A God-awful, Art House film, peppered with unexciting, herky-jerky action,
that has the AUDACITY to call itself a "Bond-Film"!! X-(
(An incredibly generous!) * out of 5
Thanks, Danny-Boy! I can't wait to see it! :007) -{
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
There was one flaw though. That Spanish woman was the modern equivalent of the double-taking pigeon. )
Yea - but she had just lost her cherry
So *that's* why she looked so shocked.
It was a 'double-taking' pigeon moment, only a bit more sophisticated, befitting a sophisticated movie.
Great to see you enjoyed it to avakey (the movie, not the old lady losing her cherry). I don't understand where the hate is coming from - Quantum of Solace really is a remarkable Bond film.
American cousins, do not worry! I thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish.
OK, if you're a lover of Roger and his raised eyebrow, Pierce's double-entendres and Q and his gadgets - you will probably hate it.
It is a tour de force for Craig, the settings and situations are pleasingly Bondian (loved the Tosca sequence) and the music, action and photography are excellent. The support cast are uniformly impressive, and the few jokes drew some out-loud laughs from the audience.
The gunbarrel worked for me, too, both in its placement and the quality of the image.
The only things I would criticise are the theme song (sung out of tune at times - perhaps deliberately??) and the main titles, which were forgettable.
From me: 8/10
PS As a teacher, the joke about which hotels our salary would stretch to got an extra chuckle from me!
American cousins, do not worry! I thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish.
OK, if you're a lover of Roger and his raised eyebrow, Pierce's double-entendres and Q and his gadgets - you will probably hate it.
It is a tour de force for Craig, the settings and situations are pleasingly Bondian (loved the Tosca sequence) and the music, action and photography are excellent. The support cast are uniformly impressive, and the few jokes drew some out-loud laughs from the audience.
The gunbarrel worked for me, too, both in its placement and the quality of the image.
The only things I would criticise are the theme song (sung out of tune at times - perhaps deliberately??) and the main titles, which were forgettable.
From me: 8/10
PS As a teacher, the joke about which hotels our salary would stretch to got an extra chuckle from me!
I loved it but I know they've changed Bond forever now. I thought/hoped Casino Royale was a one off but I know after seeing QOS it was the start of the change for Bond.
Casino Roayle and QOS are different to all the others.
All the characters are more in depth with greater characterisation and Bond himself is more like the character in the books (like he was suppose to be) rather than the "indestructible" womaniser he was shown to be in the previous films.
Its just a big change to take in after 50 years of history. I thought it was better than Casino Royale though.
But maybe this is me stuck in my old Bond ways, I grew up with Brosnan so I'm not used to this and I've watched the others so many times its hard to get used to.
Put it this way, it may not seem like a "classic" bond film. Partly because there's no Q or gadgets but the essence of what James Bond was suppose to be is there, so it does make it a Bond film. Just because all of the old antics are less obvious doesn't mean there not there and it doesn't make it less of a bond film.
What counts is what the heroine provokes, or rather what she represents. She is the one, or rather the love or fear she inspires in the hero , or else the concern he feels for her, who makes him act the way he does.
Author of 'Pussy Galore - A Representation of Women in James Bond Films'.
Active tweeter and tumbler - https://twitter.com/surrie_fullard
Great review. I have to wait another agonising three weeks to see QoS. I just know I will place it in my top Bond films list, and I can't wait to do so in my AJB dossier.
I welcomed the film. This is a side of Bond that hasn't been done before a ruthless killer, solitary man who is out for himself and revenge for the loss of his love. :x
I loved every minute of this fast pace film.-{
I've enjoyed all the Bond films and the characters of the past, which are fitting of that time. So in my eyes, QoS is a breath of fresh air and after all, nothing stays the same forever. Everything has to evolve and I for one can't wait for it to come out on DVD and for the next film to be made.
Wow!
Saw it yesterday afternoon in a packed Leicester Square Odeon, it was really fabulous! I am going to write a fuller review in the spolier thread, but all in all I loved it.
I caught the first showing around these parts..and I enjoyed it. It's Bond...but not as we know him.
Greene is under-developed as a character, I'd have liked much more from him...the action sequences are good and Craig delivers again..he's in serious danger of becoming my favourite Bond...
The film can be a bit too 'fast paced' at times...I'd have like a few more seconds to see what was actually happening...rather than being thrown all over the place...Bourne, huh ?
It's not CR, but then it was never going to be that good..still a good entry into the Bond cannon....although the title sequence left me underwhelmed...and they used a different version of the theme song too...Dench is on top form as well...plus I liked the very end shot..it reminds me of a paperback cover for OHMSS...
Overall - 8 out of 10.
I look forward to watching it again.
Well not suprisingly Sir Miles I find myself quoting you -for I could not agree more. The fast nature of the film for me was its only real drawback -but not all of the time -just purely because the action was just so grandiose and spectacular and difficult to comprehend - but - that on subsequent viewings will be remedied as the brain will be able to spot those little bits we may not have caught on that first viewing - the nuiences that make those scene's all the more brilliant. Craig is Bond for me now -he has the believability factor in his performance - and man that man can fight! -Certainly the plot could have been fleshed out a little more -but put this film into perspective. Bond is out for revenge -and there is an anger there -hence the very violent and angry pace to the movie. I should imagine the next Bond film will have a more "thriller" feel to it with espionage being the core of the movie as 007 investigates Quantum. I should imagine Mr White will still have a role to play whether it be a physical role of actually acting or just reference on the screens in MI6 who knows? But either way I am now really excited about the whole set up -and I think the formula of sticking one really frantically paced movie into the mix is one that has been done before -in Brosnan's era it was TND for example. Anyway a 9 out of 10 for me and this film will no doubt be watched regularly once it has its DVD release.
If I was given the option, I would ask for the cinema ticket money back. At two instances during the film I had to prop my eyes open. The direction amateurish, the plot lacking and the score moorish. You kind of figure that you would have to see it twice to see where it all went wrong but I would rather save my money.It was such a let down, It is reminiscent of the Jump of the dam with the exception that QoS goes even further over the cliff
Ok I went to see Quantum of Solace on Firday opening night...
And I have to admit ... an entertaining film pretty reasonable... but fairly poor compared to Casino Royale...
Just too many of the real Bond elements are missing and its not getting any better...
Desmond Llewelyn did say one thing in an interview that has always stuck in my head in regards to the Bond film formula.. ''If there was not a Q, there wouldn't have been a Bond''
and thats the bloody problem with QoS. there no gadgetery what so ever. at least in CR, there was the little torch flash bomb used by the airport terrorist and the medical equipment and silenced P99 build into the glove box of the Aston DBS. which kept the flavour of gadgets alive to some degree.
For me QoS is boarder line Jason Borne. and why the hell was Peter Lamont not on this film. the man's track record and acheivments makes him an essential key to the production. For me there was too many paralels with DIE ANOTHER DAY . firstly , that realy poor Parachute jump with Bond and Camilie, after all the effors in CR to make the stunts real and outstanding and fresh what do they do ,,, Lets use Pathetic, Fake CGI again, I know it ruined DAD but lets do it again. another parallel to DAD was the obvious previous Bond film referances which were un-nesesary here, the girl dead on the Bed covered in oil' GOLDFINGER its been done... Bond and the girl walking through the desert in smart dress, and Bond knocking the guy off the roof by hitting his arm off his tie / shirt again TSWLM... and other bits here and there.
Dominic Greene , a pathetic waste of a character. trying to look evil , same sort of cover as Gustav graves helping the planet idea , The diamond mine now Green Planet. also his sort of side-kick elvis another pointless waste of an actors wage, and look closely hardly speaks, not a hint of character , and he even looks and acts a little like Gustav Graves's technician side-kick ''Vlad'' who modifys his armour suit and mantains the icarus satalite. its getting a little old.
If Q dosent come back in the next film I am seriously considering boycotting it. and the character has to be played by a good actor such as Michael Gambon or John Scessions. someone of that nature.
I would give QoS a 6/10 where as CR was a 9/10
in CR the casino scenes were very enjoyable a lot of talking and character development. in QoS chase after chase after chase a bit of CGI and then another bloody chase and perhaps the odd explosion, more CGI and then a chase...
it may sound like i hate the film i dont it was worth watching , entertaining but it kills me that there going too far from the Bond formula and it was not a worthy sequal to CASINO ROYALE.
the only actual character development in QoS was that od Renie Mathis, a great character brilliantly played.. Judi Dench was on good form. Daniel was also pretty good not as good as CR but he saves the film to some degree.
Agent Feilds could have played a bigger role by far. Cammile a bit of a cheap Bond girl.. not the classy standards you expect from a Bond beauty. although very attractive, a character let down..
Lets hope Bond 23 'lIVE BY ONE RULE DIE BY ANOTHER' gets back to the traditional Bond.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,541MI6 Agent
WTF, SGG, is it really necessary to post the exact same post in three different threads. I was halfway through this when I'd realised I'd already read it twice in the two other spoiler threads
Thanks to my usual owner of cinema friend, I have seen it already (months before it will be released here in Italy )). Privately of course. Which makes it even better, since I get the best seat, the best sound etc etc etc.
Except it didn't improve things one bit. I thought this was dreadful. Just dreadful. I was ready to give it the benefit of the doubt before seeing it, if only for the fact I disliked CR so much that I didn't think it could go worse. But this one managed to sink much lower.
It was even more boring than CR because it was impossible to follow the plot, my interest wasn't picked for one single second. Many characters were useless and underdeveloped, may as well not have been there at all.
I dislike Craig as Bond, I don't care how good an actor he is or he is not, and it's nothing personal against him, to me he just doesn't look or act like Bond at all, period.
And most of all, this movie had exactly the features that I feared the franchise was going into when they did CR. It is absolutely not James Bond. It is a bad and I underline bad copy of Jason Bourne. A random action movie that could have anybody as the protagonist, as we see no James Bond here.
To quote someone before me:
Just too many of the real Bond elements are missing and its not getting any better...
I am now convinced that as long as Daniel Craig is Bond, I'm not gonna go to the cinema to see the movies. And I didn't even have to pay. :O Had I been a paying spectator, I would've wanted the ticket money back, or the movie title to be changed into "You think you're gonna see James Bond? Think again, it's just a cheap copy of Jason Bourne".
Just out of a couple of dresses and the pre-title sequence shot outside the door of my house I give it a generous one * out of five.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
Don't get me wrong, I loved this film, but I personally didn't think it was quite as good as Casino Royale. However this is a big credit to Casino Royale for setting the bar so high. Though at the same time, you get the impression that they weren't tyring to outdo Casino Royale, but just trying to compliment it and continue it's success. I think they did this very well.
The only main negative point I can find is the storyline concerning the bad-guy, Greene. I wont give away any of the story, but I felt that his scheme could have been explained in more simple terms. I think that part of the plot got a bit twisted, whereas more time could have been spent on the two parallel missions of Bond and Camille.
I know it sounds like a big deal, but it just isn't. If you're going to watch this film - and by all means, do! - then I'd suggest that you don't worry if you don't fully understand Greene's plotting. Just enjoy the fantastic acting talent and the litereally explosive action sequences!
Some niggles not to do with the film; not sure the sound is so great at this venue really [Edit: and Graham Rye agrees in his review]. I had to listen to hear the dialogue and there's a lot of it at times. (I don't have trouble with other movies at other cinemas, just Bond at this venue).
Also, er, they show trailers for QoS before the film, only tied into some product placement. WTF? Also a trailer for the WW2 Daniel Craig film, plus Australia with Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman looking, well, just like Bond really. Hmm.
Then just as the audience are primed for the film, you get Danny Craig popping up again saying, hey, don't video record this will you? Showing stunt work with wires clips. Like, kill the suspension of disbelief before you start, why don't you.
Visually QoS is a sumptious masterpiece. I mean that. The cinematography puts me in mind of Moonraker, and that is a compliment. Some of those compositional shots, including the martini at the bar, just look wonderful.
Craig is more good looking in this one too and David Arnold's music is evocative and tuneful, it creates an atmosphere.
There are little visual references to other Bonds that are very satisfying. Little nods here and there.
Sadly, though, it lacks Moonraker's taste, intelligence, finesse and depth. Yes, you read that correctly, not words I would associate with that film myself, even though it's second on my list. Because it's non-stop action, well, I don't mind the Bourne stuff, but the whole thing put me in mind of films like Never Say Never Again, or - gulp - Die Another Day. It just doesn't feel right.
The opening action scene is a bone crunching amazing opening, wonderful wonderful stuff. And the main tune is really okay in this context.
But within 15 mins there are so many WTF plot holes I just knew what I was dealing with and gave up. Events and plot lines seque into each other like in some Pink Panther comedy.
I won't go on, I have a reputation as a naysayer as it is, but honestly, I have to agree with Alessandra. Except, I should add that the lack of gadgets and so on, Q etc is not one of my gripes.
Comments
watch the film and forget the old ones, then you'll appreciate it.
Six.
{[] Lazenby880. I'm just so happy to be writing positives. There's been so much bad press lately, that I thought the film must be a dud. To find out that it's one of the best films of the year was a delight. There was one flaw though. That Spanish woman was the modern equivalent of the double-taking pigeon.
Yea - but she had just lost her cherry
Its been 24 hours since I left the cinema and I just can't stop thinking about it. As I mentioned before the fire fight through the restaurant was probably one of the most wonderful pieces of cinematography I have had the pleasure to watch.
When people complain that they want their 'old' Bond back then remind them of Roger fighting off enemies with tennis rackets and impersonating Tarzan.
Of Pierce in his invisible car, and kite surfing on the worst CGI ocean I have ever witnessed.
Thanks, Danny-Boy! I can't wait to see it! :007) -{
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
At her age. No wonder she looks so sad!
It was a 'double-taking' pigeon moment, only a bit more sophisticated, befitting a sophisticated movie.
Great to see you enjoyed it to avakey (the movie, not the old lady losing her cherry). I don't understand where the hate is coming from - Quantum of Solace really is a remarkable Bond film.
OK, if you're a lover of Roger and his raised eyebrow, Pierce's double-entendres and Q and his gadgets - you will probably hate it.
It is a tour de force for Craig, the settings and situations are pleasingly Bondian (loved the Tosca sequence) and the music, action and photography are excellent. The support cast are uniformly impressive, and the few jokes drew some out-loud laughs from the audience.
The gunbarrel worked for me, too, both in its placement and the quality of the image.
The only things I would criticise are the theme song (sung out of tune at times - perhaps deliberately??) and the main titles, which were forgettable.
From me: 8/10
PS As a teacher, the joke about which hotels our salary would stretch to got an extra chuckle from me!
Don't sit at the front of the cinema.
Don't think of it as CR mark 2.
Better than DAD, not as good as FrWL.
I'll post a full review upon second viewing.
Casino Roayle and QOS are different to all the others.
All the characters are more in depth with greater characterisation and Bond himself is more like the character in the books (like he was suppose to be) rather than the "indestructible" womaniser he was shown to be in the previous films.
Its just a big change to take in after 50 years of history. I thought it was better than Casino Royale though.
But maybe this is me stuck in my old Bond ways, I grew up with Brosnan so I'm not used to this and I've watched the others so many times its hard to get used to.
Put it this way, it may not seem like a "classic" bond film. Partly because there's no Q or gadgets but the essence of what James Bond was suppose to be is there, so it does make it a Bond film. Just because all of the old antics are less obvious doesn't mean there not there and it doesn't make it less of a bond film.
Author of 'Pussy Galore - A Representation of Women in James Bond Films'.
Active tweeter and tumbler - https://twitter.com/surrie_fullard
Sharpshooter - I feel your pain. X-( It's three weeks for me as well. It sounds like it will be worth the wait, though.
I loved every minute of this fast pace film.-{
I've enjoyed all the Bond films and the characters of the past, which are fitting of that time. So in my eyes, QoS is a breath of fresh air and after all, nothing stays the same forever. Everything has to evolve and I for one can't wait for it to come out on DVD and for the next film to be made.
Saw it yesterday afternoon in a packed Leicester Square Odeon, it was really fabulous! I am going to write a fuller review in the spolier thread, but all in all I loved it.
{[]
I loved it!
Very fast paced, gritty, interesting and had a few funny moments.
If I had to be negative then I would say: it wouldn't make much sense if you haven't seen CR as it is a direct sequel, and the villain wasn't great.
Well worth going to see!
Well not suprisingly Sir Miles I find myself quoting you -for I could not agree more. The fast nature of the film for me was its only real drawback -but not all of the time -just purely because the action was just so grandiose and spectacular and difficult to comprehend - but - that on subsequent viewings will be remedied as the brain will be able to spot those little bits we may not have caught on that first viewing - the nuiences that make those scene's all the more brilliant. Craig is Bond for me now -he has the believability factor in his performance - and man that man can fight! -Certainly the plot could have been fleshed out a little more -but put this film into perspective. Bond is out for revenge -and there is an anger there -hence the very violent and angry pace to the movie. I should imagine the next Bond film will have a more "thriller" feel to it with espionage being the core of the movie as 007 investigates Quantum. I should imagine Mr White will still have a role to play whether it be a physical role of actually acting or just reference on the screens in MI6 who knows? But either way I am now really excited about the whole set up -and I think the formula of sticking one really frantically paced movie into the mix is one that has been done before -in Brosnan's era it was TND for example. Anyway a 9 out of 10 for me and this film will no doubt be watched regularly once it has its DVD release.
the only thing i would say is
unless you have seen casino royale the first bit wont make sence (MAN IN BOOT)
@merseytart
And I have to admit ... an entertaining film pretty reasonable... but fairly poor compared to Casino Royale...
Just too many of the real Bond elements are missing and its not getting any better...
Desmond Llewelyn did say one thing in an interview that has always stuck in my head in regards to the Bond film formula.. ''If there was not a Q, there wouldn't have been a Bond''
and thats the bloody problem with QoS. there no gadgetery what so ever. at least in CR, there was the little torch flash bomb used by the airport terrorist and the medical equipment and silenced P99 build into the glove box of the Aston DBS. which kept the flavour of gadgets alive to some degree.
For me QoS is boarder line Jason Borne. and why the hell was Peter Lamont not on this film. the man's track record and acheivments makes him an essential key to the production. For me there was too many paralels with DIE ANOTHER DAY . firstly , that realy poor Parachute jump with Bond and Camilie, after all the effors in CR to make the stunts real and outstanding and fresh what do they do ,,, Lets use Pathetic, Fake CGI again, I know it ruined DAD but lets do it again. another parallel to DAD was the obvious previous Bond film referances which were un-nesesary here, the girl dead on the Bed covered in oil' GOLDFINGER its been done... Bond and the girl walking through the desert in smart dress, and Bond knocking the guy off the roof by hitting his arm off his tie / shirt again TSWLM... and other bits here and there.
Dominic Greene , a pathetic waste of a character. trying to look evil , same sort of cover as Gustav graves helping the planet idea , The diamond mine now Green Planet. also his sort of side-kick elvis another pointless waste of an actors wage, and look closely hardly speaks, not a hint of character , and he even looks and acts a little like Gustav Graves's technician side-kick ''Vlad'' who modifys his armour suit and mantains the icarus satalite. its getting a little old.
If Q dosent come back in the next film I am seriously considering boycotting it. and the character has to be played by a good actor such as Michael Gambon or John Scessions. someone of that nature.
I would give QoS a 6/10 where as CR was a 9/10
in CR the casino scenes were very enjoyable a lot of talking and character development. in QoS chase after chase after chase a bit of CGI and then another bloody chase and perhaps the odd explosion, more CGI and then a chase...
it may sound like i hate the film i dont it was worth watching , entertaining but it kills me that there going too far from the Bond formula and it was not a worthy sequal to CASINO ROYALE.
the only actual character development in QoS was that od Renie Mathis, a great character brilliantly played.. Judi Dench was on good form. Daniel was also pretty good not as good as CR but he saves the film to some degree.
Agent Feilds could have played a bigger role by far. Cammile a bit of a cheap Bond girl.. not the classy standards you expect from a Bond beauty. although very attractive, a character let down..
Lets hope Bond 23 'lIVE BY ONE RULE DIE BY ANOTHER' gets back to the traditional Bond.
www.freewebs.com/scaramangasgoldengun
www.facebook.com/QuartermasterProps
www.freewebs.com/scaramangasgoldengun
www.facebook.com/QuartermasterProps
Except it didn't improve things one bit. I thought this was dreadful. Just dreadful. I was ready to give it the benefit of the doubt before seeing it, if only for the fact I disliked CR so much that I didn't think it could go worse. But this one managed to sink much lower.
It was even more boring than CR because it was impossible to follow the plot, my interest wasn't picked for one single second. Many characters were useless and underdeveloped, may as well not have been there at all.
I dislike Craig as Bond, I don't care how good an actor he is or he is not, and it's nothing personal against him, to me he just doesn't look or act like Bond at all, period.
And most of all, this movie had exactly the features that I feared the franchise was going into when they did CR. It is absolutely not James Bond. It is a bad and I underline bad copy of Jason Bourne. A random action movie that could have anybody as the protagonist, as we see no James Bond here.
To quote someone before me:
I am now convinced that as long as Daniel Craig is Bond, I'm not gonna go to the cinema to see the movies.
Just out of a couple of dresses and the pre-title sequence shot outside the door of my house I give it a generous one * out of five.
The only main negative point I can find is the storyline concerning the bad-guy, Greene. I wont give away any of the story, but I felt that his scheme could have been explained in more simple terms. I think that part of the plot got a bit twisted, whereas more time could have been spent on the two parallel missions of Bond and Camille.
I know it sounds like a big deal, but it just isn't. If you're going to watch this film - and by all means, do! - then I'd suggest that you don't worry if you don't fully understand Greene's plotting. Just enjoy the fantastic acting talent and the litereally explosive action sequences!
Some niggles not to do with the film; not sure the sound is so great at this venue really [Edit: and Graham Rye agrees in his review]. I had to listen to hear the dialogue and there's a lot of it at times. (I don't have trouble with other movies at other cinemas, just Bond at this venue).
Also, er, they show trailers for QoS before the film, only tied into some product placement. WTF? Also a trailer for the WW2 Daniel Craig film, plus Australia with Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman looking, well, just like Bond really. Hmm.
Then just as the audience are primed for the film, you get Danny Craig popping up again saying, hey, don't video record this will you? Showing stunt work with wires clips. Like, kill the suspension of disbelief before you start, why don't you.
Visually QoS is a sumptious masterpiece. I mean that. The cinematography puts me in mind of Moonraker, and that is a compliment. Some of those compositional shots, including the martini at the bar, just look wonderful.
Craig is more good looking in this one too and David Arnold's music is evocative and tuneful, it creates an atmosphere.
There are little visual references to other Bonds that are very satisfying. Little nods here and there.
Sadly, though, it lacks Moonraker's taste, intelligence, finesse and depth. Yes, you read that correctly, not words I would associate with that film myself, even though it's second on my list. Because it's non-stop action, well, I don't mind the Bourne stuff, but the whole thing put me in mind of films like Never Say Never Again, or - gulp - Die Another Day. It just doesn't feel right.
The opening action scene is a bone crunching amazing opening, wonderful wonderful stuff. And the main tune is really okay in this context.
But within 15 mins there are so many WTF plot holes I just knew what I was dealing with and gave up. Events and plot lines seque into each other like in some Pink Panther comedy.
I won't go on, I have a reputation as a naysayer as it is, but honestly, I have to agree with Alessandra. Except, I should add that the lack of gadgets and so on, Q etc is not one of my gripes.
Roger Moore 1927-2017