51

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Does anyone understand the reference to "Rene Mathis" being a code name? It certainly isn't acording to Fleming, but it seemed to have significance to Bond when Mathis dies.

52

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Barbel wrote:

Does anyone understand the reference to "Rene Mathis" being a code name? It certainly isn't acording to Fleming, but it seemed to have significance to Bond when Mathis dies.

I think someone else has mentioned that a director's cut of longer shots would be welcome. I'd like a few extra plot-setting scenes reintroduced too.

53

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Ravenstone wrote:
emtiem wrote:

Something to do with the DC3 being able to go slower?

I had to ask my other half about this one, because I didn't catch it.  Bond banks the DC3, forcing the smaller plane closer and closer to the cliffs. The smaller plane then pulls up to avoid being pushed into the cliffs, but pulls up too late.  So blows up.

Yes, but there also seems to be something about air speed- a dial is looked at a couple of times. I think the little plane is about to stall because he's trying to keep behind the DC3 which Bond is slowing down, or something.
Similarly: how does Bond chucking an anchor into the other boat make it flip?

Ravenstone wrote:
emtiem wrote:

DAD was a bit ruubish, but at least it swept you along with the idea of everything being terribly important-

I'm at a loss to even remember the whole point of DAD.  I liked it as a kind of 'Where's Waldo?' version of the Bond films - y'know, spotting all the references and stuff.  But I felt it was all very inconsequential fluff.  Nothing important.

It was, but it treated it all as the end of the world and sweeps you along with it, as with any Bond film. This one; I just didn't care about the water. As someone else pointed out: Greene's evil plans were basically to make the utility bills a bit more expensive. It's like Bond dealing with one of those mildly evil but second-rate SPECTRE plans we hear about around the boardroom in Thunderball- not exciting enough. Send him after Largo and the nukes.

54

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

emtiem wrote:

Greene's evil plans were basically to make the utility bills a bit more expensive. It's like Bond dealing with one of those mildly evil but second-rate SPECTRE plans we hear about around the boardroom in Thunderball- not exciting enough. Send him after Largo and the nukes.

Would this be an argument for a more, ah, traditional Bond film next time?

55

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Monique wrote:
emtiem wrote:

DAD was a bit ruubish, but at least it swept you along with the idea of everything being terribly important- I just didn't really care about anyone by the end of QoS: it was just three or four people in a hotel (built out of frozen petrol, presumably) very far away having a little fight over a bit of water. In CR I really felt for Bond at the end- in this I just didn't care all that much.

Wow!! ajb007/amazed ajb007/amazed  I was waiting for your review em.   Now I am really worried!!

'Fraid so. Don't get me wrong- it's not a bad film and there's enough in there for all Bond fans to enjoy- but it's a tremendous letdown coming as it is after CR.

56

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Barbel wrote:
emtiem wrote:

Greene's evil plans were basically to make the utility bills a bit more expensive. It's like Bond dealing with one of those mildly evil but second-rate SPECTRE plans we hear about around the boardroom in Thunderball- not exciting enough. Send him after Largo and the nukes.

Would this be an argument for a more, ah, traditional Bond film next time?

That's one way, yeah. Thing is, CR had a really good way of using a villain: oldest Bond plot though it technically is, it was really fresh to have a baddie who's already on the ropes but does actually work for some of the most evil guys around. We knew the high stakes for Bond (literally! ajb007/smile ), not least because Vesper kept telling us how much pressure there was on Bond an how bad these guy are. Just having a stock bad guy with the usual evil plan isn't enough for a CR sequel- we needed a similarly fresh situation for the villain. Having a not-terribly globally important scheme didn't help that all; I don't care that their water bills might be a bit more expensive. It's like a Fleming short story- not a Fleming novel.

57

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

I think I have an advantage here in that I didn't think CR was perfect.  I really, really liked it, but on successive viewings I found it over long, and with one or two set pieces too many (the whole poisoning part could have been dropped out of the film and no-one would notice).  Daniel Craig was superb, but like the novel, this was a story that effectively ended two thirds of the way through, with the villain being shot by someone else and 007 being sent to hospital - magnificent though the "Bond.  James Bond" was, it would perhaps have been better if the last third of CR was the first third of QOS.

But I'm talking ifs and maybes, so how about what I saw onscreen?  What I'm trying to say is that I didn't have astonishingly high expectations of QOS, and I wasn't disappointed, which sounds like I am damning with faint praise, but I'm not.  I had a great, enjoyable, hour and three quarters in the cinema, and the friends I went with enjoyed it too (including someone who despises 007 pre-2006 with a passion).

I'll break it down into my usual JSW list, for easy digestion:

1)  The PTS - I concur: disappointing.  I have no problem with a car chase, but I want a bit of scene setting, a bit of plot: I like to be finessed.  Fast cars on mountain roads and into a quarry is theoretically exciting, but why should I engage with these machines thrashing around when I know nothing of their occupants?  Revealing Mr White in the boot is a funny joke (and despite its reputation, this is a funny, tongue in cheek film) but how much more tense would it have been if we'd seen 007 slam him in there in the first place?

2)  I loved the titles: there, I said it. I've been a White & Keys booster since it was released, but actually I think the song wasn't good enough for the titles.  I was so pleased to see a new font!  To see that someone was thinking about the words, and not just the images: to see the gunbarrel turning up and depositing letters on the screen was exciting; and I cannot say enough times how glad I was to have naked girls gyrating to the music.  The White/Keys song had been edited badly, which struck me as a mistake (its primary role is to be in a film, not the hit parade, and yes I'm aware that using phrases like Hit Parade makes me sound like David "Kid" Jensen) but women turning into sand, then swirling around in circles, while 007 shoots at them?  Classic.

3)  If you're going to film a tense horse race which is incredibly dangerous, how about dropping the villain under the hooves?  My only complaint.  I don't get the outrage that bystanders were killed in this sequence - firstly, they were killed by the villain, not 007, thereby underlining his evil credentials: second, if I were trying to escape capture in a crowd of people, having betrayed my country and killed my colleagues, I'd pop a few innocents on the way to clear a path - not to do so would be bizarre, frankly.  But I agree that I couldn't work out how M got out of all this - the follow up dialogue didn't help.

4)  I loved the tabletop touch screen for its absurdity.  Really, how is this different to Q giving a lecture on the chemical properties of Orchidae Negra, complete with slideshow and map, or Renard's giant swirly 3D head with cross sections?  It's another example (like Casino Royale's magic all in one tracking device and blood analyser with companion venom destroyer) of the "no gadgets" being a complete smokescreen.  No, there isn't a new Snooper in this film, but yes, there is a load of silly technology which is over the top, and bless them for it.

5)  Though I give kudos to the designers for the new font in the titles, I ABSOLUTELY HATED all the different location captions.  In fact, I hated almost all of the captions and subtitles.  The worst example was the taxi ride in Bolivia, where we had the driver talking about his mother in yellow, Mathis talking to someone on the phone in white, and then having a conversation with Bond without any subtitles at all - it was all ridiculously over the top.  It also filled me with dread with what it's going to look like when the DVD comes out.

6)  I just don't get the whole Mr Slate/Camille/Greene axis; there was a whole lot of dialogue and action there which confused the hell out of me.  Maybe I'll get it on subsequent viewings.

7)  Incidentally, I love that Quantum's named associates now include Mr White, Mr Greene and Mr Slate; I look forward to Bond 23 featuring the villainous Miss Scarlet and Colonel Mustard.

8)  The speedboat chase was the worst example of the ShakyCam.  As a much wiser correspondent has already pointed out, the minute ShakyCam appears, you know there's some action on its way.  I didn't mind it for the most part, even if it did basically divide the film in two: in that way it was like TWINE, where you could tell when Michael Apted was on the set, and when he just let Vic Armstrong get on with things while he did something more important.  In the speedboat chase, the ShakyCam just confused me - at dinner afterwards, none of the people I saw the film with could help me explain how the hook somehow made the other boat fly through the air...

9)  Bond's Universal Exports card (amazing!) credits his name as R Sterling (even more amazing!).

10)  The Austrian opera scene was just fantastic from start to finish.  Cleverly done, and with the right mix of humour, tension and action.  (And was this sequence inspired by that brief mention in the QoS story, do you think?)

11)  Mathis' resurrection - even if his seven years working in South America was "convenient" - was a joy to see.  I was especially pleased with his reference to the heroes and villains being all mixed up - a nice homage to the hospital scene from the CR novel.  I wasn't sad to see him die, given that the Mathis of the novels lives and as a result has to turn up in Devil May Cry - making him an Obligatory Sacrificial Lamb for the film made sense.

12)  I admit I was already in love with Gemma Arterton before I saw the film, but I loved Fields.  She was funny, and clever, and smart; this is how you make a Bond Girl who isn't a bimbo, isn't a genius, and isn't a karate expert; you create an ordinary girl who's dragged into extraordinary circumstances.  Her death was tragic because Gemma made so much of her in her few short scenes.

13)  The reveal of the underground reservoir made the story interesting to me.  I was like many people when I heard that the villain intended to take control of the water supply: I thought, damn, has Babs been watching documentaries on the plane again?  But the idea that Greene was already creating a drought to increase his profits was fascinating, and the image of a series of underground lakes is undeniably Bondian.  No doubt in a couple of years time there will be a serious academic study which will list this film as a damning indictment of the privatisation of public utilities.

14)  Previous Bond films have, to a certain extent, always been slightly anti-American, but this film was breathtakingly so: Felix Leiter is basically the only good man in the entire 50 states.  Which sort of gives him a purpose, after all these years.  Did anyone else think that CIA Man With Appalling Tache died in an early edit of the film, given that Felix took over his job quite easily?

15)  Olga Kurylenko is a stunningly beautiful actress, and she convinced throughout, but especially in the sinkhole scene.  Even if her entire story was so much like the back story of my own dear Kindie Sinclair, it hurt...

16)  Isn't it lucky that bus services in the desert are so reliable?

17)  Judi Dench was magnificent - is there any point in me saying that?  It's surely taken as read.  I'd have been happier if she'd stayed at home, instead of jetting all over the place to shout orders, but I loved her cold creaming her face while being commanding.

18)  Dominic Greene is, in effect, Emilio Largo - he is a small time hood with a bunch of money behind him.  But Matthieu Almaric was brilliantly slimy - you could see where Michel Lonsdale had given him hints.  I liked his dominance of the General, and his shifty eyes, though for my own well being I wish he didn't remind me of Sarcozy quite so much...

19)  I can't believe there has been criticism on this very forum about the ease with which the building explodes at the end.  Have you not seen a Bond film before? Everything explodes, always, continually; at least in this film there was a bit of clunky dialogue about fuel cells to explain it, unlike GoldenEye, where they just happened to keep a load of exploding substances in an important place.  And the explosions  gave us that powerful moment when Camille begs Bond to kill her, rather than letting her burn to death, and it looks like he might do it.   

20)  The confrontation with Vesper's former love in Russia; wonderfully handled, and really underlining the idea that Bond may be a killer, but that doesn't mean he's a bad secret agent - he's learned, and he's grown.

21)  The gunbarrel - should've been at the start, of course, but, hell: seeing Daniel Craig do the whole walk-point-shoot was fantastic.  However, if this isn't the opening shot of Bond 23, I will cut someone.

22)  Daniel Craig was superb without.  I almost forget to write this, because I took it as read: he doesn't make a single wrong step in the entire film.  I cannot wait for the next Bond film largely because I'm fascinated to know what his 007 will do next.

The level of vitriol directed at QoS has confused me, because it is no way a bad film.  It's exciting and tense and funny and clever; it's a good Bond film.  I think there may be a division between people who liked Bond films and people who liked Casino Royale.  The two aims are not mutually exclusive; but if you liked Bond 21 better than the previous 20, Bond 22 won't feel right to you.  If you walk in the cinema expecting CR II: The Revenge, you will be disappointed.  If you walk in the cinema expecting a good time because it's the new Bond film, you'll have a great time.  QOS is, to me, the Tomorrow Never Dies to Casino Royale's GoldenEye - it's not as brainy, or thought provoking, but it's damned entertaining, and it delivers action and excitement in spades.

Founder of the Wint & Kidd Appreciation Society.

@merseytart

58

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Sounds like a fine film.  I suspect that folks reacting so badly to it really were focused less on it as a film and more on it not being a traditional formulaic Bond, which I don't believe we're ready for just yet.  As Daniel Craig said in an interview, that has to be "earned."  I also recall a few reviewers upset about innocent bystanders being killed, as though this is the first time that's ever happened.  If I recall correctly, at least three innocent bystanders are killed in Casino Royale during Mollaka's attempt to escape from Bond at the construction site.  I also recall cringing at the silliness of the French guy getting apoplectic when his car is hijacked during A View to a Kill and loathe the notion of ever returning to that level of borderline camp.

Last edited by Gassy Man (2nd Nov 2008 02:27)

59

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

So Quantum has doubled utility bills in Bolivia.  I don't know about the rest of Europe and the States but our utility providers do that every couple of years anyway.

Now if Quantum had been a consortium of international bankers who through sheer greed had brought the worlds financial system to its knees that would have been a scary plot - naw no-one would ever believe that could happen.

60

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Great post and review jsw.

My only major long-standing problem with the film is that as a whole, it is not as good as the sum of its parts (oh, and my unsteady cam induced headache has only just gone).

61

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Gassy Man wrote:

Sounds like a fine film.  I suspect that folks reacting so badly to it really were focused less on it as a film and more on it not being a traditional formulaic Bond, which I don't believe we're ready for just yet.

Not really- I wanted Casino Royale 2 because that's what we were told we were getting. I wanted a good film over a good Bond film. What we got was a trad Bond but whilst trying to do the small-scale aspect of CR: the mix doesn't work.
It's a decent enough Bond film but it's not worthy of following CR (which, no- I didn't think was perfect, but it got more right than this).

Last edited by emtiem (2nd Nov 2008 15:10)

62

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

jetsetwilly wrote:

14)  Previous Bond films have, to a certain extent, always been slightly anti-American, but this film was breathtakingly so: Felix Leiter is basically the only good man in the entire 50 states.  Which sort of gives him a purpose, after all these years.  Did anyone else think that CIA Man With Appalling Tache died in an early edit of the film, given that Felix took over his job quite easily?

I don't think the CIA or Americans were badly demonized in comparison to the MI6 or British, because Quantum had a operative who was a power behind the throne in Number 10 for crying out loud, with the CIA guy with the dated mostache being depicted as cynical and incompetent, rather than evil. He saw Greene and the General as uselful tools for fighting Marxism in South America, not knowing Greene represented a highly dangerous conspiracy.

'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...'

63

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Have just seen it, and came away satisfied as a movie-goer, that I'd seen a good well-made thriller, but extremely disappointed that I'd not seen a Bond movie.

I fear for some of us the traditional Bond may be gone forever. Times change, and ultimately, Sony and the Broccolis make these films to make money. Casino Royale was stellar at the box-office, and I'm sure QoS will be too. This means that now, in the 21st Century, they are making the films that moviegoers want to see, but that leaves a lot of us out in the cold.

All I saw was a 'template' spy-thriller, full of twists-and-turns, action and set-pieces. I can appreciate the tone, gritty, realistic, current, etc, and can enjoy and appreciate what was a 'very good' entry to the genre, at that level.

But I dare anyone to think back on what their favourite Bonds are, and I bet all the reasons you liked those, are truly missing from the current reboots.

What made Bond movies a unique experience, that set them aside from the others in the genre, has now been stripped away, making Bond simply 'comparable' to the best of the competition in the genre.

And that's a shame...

64

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Hmmm, I think my feelings about QOS have pretty much been covered by everybody already. I did like the film, but there were a lot of things that just didn't fit right...the title sequence was lame, the woman in the sand was too subtle and the whole thing too slow. The opening was fast and furious and the gun barrel at the end....No No NO NO!

Anyway, it was a good film...there I was thinking CR was different, this is vastly different...I will need to see it again to make my mind up, I am still mulling it over in my head.

Last point - a continuity issue - did anybody notice how Bond's hair went from newly cut when he first turned up in Bolivia (I think it was then - first sight of him in cream Levis, blue polo?) to quite a bit longer when they had parachuted into the bore hole? It could have only been days apart...unless I missed something in the speed of the film.

Dryden: How did he die?
James Bond: Your contact? Not well.
Dryden: Made you feel it, did he? Well, you needn't worry. The second is...
James Bond: Yes... considerably.

65

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

I didn't like QOS as a Bond film.

'Casino Royale' was, and felt like, an "event" movie, as Bond movies should be... but this latest is the worst kind of sequel. It feels like an after-thought or a footnote to CR without achieving any greatness of its own.

Putting the gunbarrel sequence at the end of the film seems silly. It doesn't work to have it there... especially after Bond has just DECLINED to shoot his man (Vesper's former boyfriend.) The gunbarrel sequence should all be about the excitement of settling down to a new Bond movie... i.e., it should be there at the start!  Positioning it at the end of QoS simply reinforces, I'm afraid, a feeling that the movie we've just seen never really lived up to everyone's high expectations. I watched QoS in a packed Odeon cinema in Manchester City Centre at 10.00PM on Saturday night - its first weekend. Yet there were no cheers at the start of the movie... and none at the end. People just left in silence. Why...? I think it's because this unnecessary messing around with our favourite trademark conventions of James Bond is spoiling the fun.

The credits sequence is as poor as the main title track. That awful new font for the credits themselves... give us a break! In fact, there's no compelling overall theme to hold together all the different aspects of the production... no secure "high concept"... so it all seems a bit of a jumble, as if it's not sure what it's about. 

The plot is messy and confusing. All that nonsense to do with enigmas, unanswered questions and loose ends is, in this case, just a cover for lazy / chaotic story-telling. For example, I still don't understand Mathis's involvement.

I usually go and see a new Bond film in the cinema several times, with different friends. This time I don't feel inclined to pay out again. I'll wait for the DVD release in order to ponder the more obscure ambiguities in the plot... when I can be bothered. (That'll require a certain kind of fanboy geekiness that I've never before associated with the Bond franchise... and don't want to!)

The action sequences try to be innovative but the flash, POV editing flattens out the marks, beats and pay-offs that make for entertaining action. And in the climax we're seeing again some of the same types of CGI that ruined the action in 'Die Another Day'.

There are too many cruel killings... in too close succession. The cruelty is part of the reason why, in this case, Bond's few one-liners leave the audience cold. We're not really behind this character in the way that we used to be.

The only thing that prevents the movie from being boring is the quality of the actors, including Daniel Craig himself. The fine cast deserved better writing, direction and editing than this. Smarten up, Eon.

Shady Tree

Last edited by Shady Tree (2nd Nov 2008 17:32)

66

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

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.

67

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Deja vu with that post.

..................http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a77/darkcrown_1969/Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............

68

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

sorry

69

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Now I'm getting 'sorry' deja vu's... ya nutter ajb007/biggrin

..................http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a77/darkcrown_1969/Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............

70

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

ajb007/lol

71

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Heres some thoughts from another forum I go on, which has nothing to do whith Bond or films...

'Anybody else find it mega confusing?
What was with the ending? ? ? ?'

'It's bad.  Poor plot, no gadgets, no classic one liners and poor filming.  Only the intro car chase was good but even that had no proper story behind it.  Waste of time.'

'The filimg was crap. I didn't know what was going on! Also the worst ending ever!'

'Did anyone else find it properly confusing?
I dint have a clue what was goin on lol ....'

'Kind of disapointed in it to be honest, not what I expected.' ....

72

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

I have to admit, part of me liked the film imensely because it was so different. However, there are some serious downsides.

The action sequences were just too frenetic. Most of the time I couldn't tell what on earth was happening, who was hitting who, who had just been thrown off the boat or blown up, which car had just clipped the lorry etc. About 30 minutes in I whispered to my wife that it was 'more Bourne than Bourne'. The whole pace of the film was too fast, and forgive me if I'm wrong but wasn't the opening car chase sequence supposed to be 20 minutes long ? It only seemed like 5 minutes to me, which is perhaps where the 'missing' 15 minutes from the total running time (to make it 2 hours) went. The title sequences were uninspiring, and the theme tune poor at best. The story wasn't all that confusing though - and why are people slagging off the Dominic Greene character ? Quantum is clearly a powerful and large organisation, and one the Greene was nothing but a bit-part player. You dont have to have a meglomaniac with a stealth ship or volcano to be a convincing villain. Ok, Greene's character is flawed and not particularly menacing -  but neither was Le Chiffre ! Lets not forget the scene in CR where the African freedom fighters break into Le Chiffre's hotel room and threaten his girfriend.

The characterisations of Mathis, Greene, M, Mr White and Bond himself were excellent - not forgetting Leiter, who was perfectly cast and very well played. Daniel Craig is excellent as a brooding, killing machine - far more realistic in these times than a gadget laden Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan. MI6 operatives DO NOT wake up in the morning clean shaven and wearing a Tux !

The problem with this film is the editing, the pace and the constant location chopping and changing. I felt physically sick during the boat chase because of the bouncy camera work (a la Saving Private Ryan). I think filmakers feel that this style gets you, as the audience, more involved in the scene, but for me I just found it annoying and nausiating.   

Gemma Arterton was sorely underutilsed and her oil scene death beared no resemblence to the plot of the film - Quantum were after controling the water supply of Boliva thus making vast finacial wealth as the only utilities supplier to the Military Junta. At no point was oil brought into the equation, so I agree - stop putting these little homages to previous films in there. ajb007/insane

This film is a bold move and not a complete disaster. personally, I would rather see a gritty, realistic Bond played by Craig than the same character driving an invisible car with Brosnans perfect fringe line.

Personally I would like to see Bond 23 continue in the same vein, but without the shaky camera work and dodgy editing. Oh, and you want gadgets ? Wasn't the Sony Cybershot phone Bond used to ID the Quantum operatives at the rendition of Tosca not enough ? Why does he need a plethora of exploding pens/cigarettes/radio active bow ties and invisible cars at his disposal ?

OHMSS is now being hailed as one of the best Bond films by certain people because it was thin on gadgets and thick on characterisation. It dealt with Bond as a human being and that is exactly how Daniel Craig is playing the part.

Just my two penny's worth.

The Voice

Last edited by The Voice (2nd Nov 2008 22:09)

73

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Welcome to the forums, Voice!

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

74

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Just saw it. It's excellent but it's too fast, some of the action sequences lose impact by coming one after the other - otherwise it's a more adult Bond and all the better for it. Once I've seen it again I'll no doubt find things to quibble over, but for now, IAN FLEMING’S JAMES BOND is back and that's good enough for me.

75

Re: Quantum of Solace Reviews

Bond throws the anchor into the boat, which has mounted the back of his boat.  He then pulls away violently, which catches the anchor in the chasing boat and yanks the nose down, forcing the back up and dislodging the crew.  Also, the chasing boat is inflatable, and the anchor appears to puncture it.