|
Direct by: Marc Forster Starring: Daniel Craig, Olga Kurylenko, Mathieu Amalric, Judi Dench If I had to sum up this film, it would be "The James Borne Identity". Quantum of Solace follows off less than an hour from the ending of Casino Royale. Much of what you heard about this film is true. In start contrast to the methodical poker game in Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace is the polar opposite. This movie is a mixed bag. There are some strong points countered with some equally weak points. When I watched this last night, there was just something odd yet reminiscent. Then I read a local review which gave me the answer; some of the key people in this film, notably the action scenes, were veterans from the Bourne-series. Indeed, this film feels more like Jason Bourne rather than James Bond. From the blistering and gritty fight scenes to the numerous chase scenes; and believe me, there are chase scenes with almost every mode of transport invented, from car, boat, bike to plane. Furthermore, the fact that the film is about Bond finding revenge and for some quantum of solace makes it more Borne than Bond. He probably should have just started shouting "Who am I" just to get it out of the way. The film also suffers from some odd pacing. At times it feels like you are being brought to various places to see a specific scene, then jumps to another for another to occur. It feels like they entire movie can be summed up as "Okay Bond is at A. Okay now Bond is immedately at B. Okay now he teleported to C. Okay now back to A, but since we are showing you how he gets there, its going to be a chase somehow. Okay now let's jump to D." While this may sound pretty normal, the various places are in various spans of the world, some remote. One minute they are in the middle of literally nowhere, and the next they are sitting comfortably in a luscious hotel room. From the wide range of locales it feels like Around the World in 60 days...but in 106 minutes. The ending also feels heavily rushed. Granted, there weren't really many unnecessary scenes in this film, they probably could have gotten away with a slightly longer run time. The product placement gets kind of annoying too. As with the previous one and the next one, its a Ford-fest. I suppose one of his mission objectives was to show case the various brands under the aegis of the Ford conglomerate. But not before sing his SONY ERICSSON TM mobile phone. In fact Bond eschews many of his trademark gadgets and relies on his SONY ERICSSON TM phone as the only real gadget that he not so subtly relies upon. On the other hand, MI6 had a radical makeover with some pretty cool tech upgrades that were quite enjoyable. The acting is quite solid. Craig makes a good Bond, showing his arid yet turbulent emotions underneath convincingly. Amalric's character is somewhat annoying but also enjoyable. When he was first introduced, I thought he was a supporting henchman. Yet he does carry out Dominic Greene quite well, showing that villains can be deep beneath the surface. His character does seem fundamentally flawed, as he comes off more comedic than anything. His interaction with Kurylenko as Camille Montes comes off more as sit-com-ish more than anything. Virtually all of their dialogue is in the form of banter and comebacks. While it does highlight their basis and nature of their relationship, it can get quite annoying and distracting. Dench comes off brilliantly as well with more screen time. While most of my review is quite negative and highlights the flaws, it is an enjoyable movie. The problem is, it does not feel like a Bond movie at all. Still, I would recommend it. It is a solid piece of work with some well put together scenes. The story may be a bit lacking, but it is to be expected from films such as these. Rating: 3.5/5 Kenshi fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Nov 7, 2008 |
#
?
Nov 7, 2008 14:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 10:15 |
|
|
Just saw this tonight and I loved it. Some parts seemed a bit hard to follow at times but it wasn't hard to keep up. The film is paced very well, a lot of action very entertaining. Lots of "gently caress yeah" moments and every vehicle imaginable is used in various chases. The movie opened up incredibly as well and it's true it starts right after the last one. I was a bit annoyed with the last sequence The exploding hotel???but other than that it was awesome. See this movie! 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2008 05:30
|
|
|
Swings between action and plot like it was on vacation in the caribbean with a willing wife. Not a bad thing though, since the plot was pretty good and the action entertaining. Bonds got some nice moves in this one with surprisingly little gunplay. Proves that the only tools an agent needs is a weapon and communication with all the fancy equipment back at base. And this time around MI6 has some very fancy equipment. The last sequence was a little showier then needed and the title song isn't near my favorite for the series but those are minor quips. 4/5
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2008 06:14
|
|
|
I only saw Casino Royale back when it was in the cinema so that made the plot of this one hard to follow. I know they're trying to take the Bond franchise to new places but the lack of gadgests was quite disappointing. I absolutely hated the direction in the action scenes because there were so many quick camera shots. In fact in the first chase scene (the first of about two dozen) it made it hard to follow what was going on. And the plane chase scene... just wedged in there and it wasn't even any good. Poor, poor film, a waste of the ticket cost. 2/5
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2008 12:17
|
|
|
I'm confused by the current trend of staging elaborate action and then cutting it rapidly and with so many close-ups that you have little sense of spacial relationships and WTF is happening. It feels like Hollywood decided for the viewers that this was what they wanted. Well, I never wanted it. It's basically the same problem that has always plagued American vs Asian action films. We rapidly cut fight and chase scenes until there is no flow, while a good HK actioner will use lots of long cuts that actually flow one into the next. Anyway, I have no idea what this movie was going for. I really wish it had been an autonomous chapter and not founded on Casino Royale. Points for Daniel Craig being the super badass I always wanted Bond to be. 3/5
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2008 08:48
|
|
|
There might just be too many action scenes in this movie. They are mostly solid, but it seems like Bond just can't walk into a room without killing a few guys and blowing the whole place up. The plot is basically classic Bond. Evil organisation must be stopped against all odds with the help of some pretty girls. There is just too little time left to explain all the political stakes and international relationships that are implied. Nevertheless, I was entertained (the title song blows though). 3.5/5
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2008 23:36
|
|
|
I wasn't really sure if I liked Casine Royale when I first saw it, but then it grew on me because although it wasn't a typical Bond movie it had a lot going for it. I didn't think this was the case for Quantum of Solace. They've gone too far from the qualities that made the other movies good. They didn't have any gadgets, and Bond didn't really do anything too clever. He just used brute force with everything. Also there was a lot less comedy than the other movies. The redeeming parts were the first chase scene which was really well done and Bond being more of a bad-rear end than in other movies. 3.5/5 Scottw330 fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Jun 25, 2009 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2008 06:50
|
|
|
Hm. The feedback for this movie has been more negative than I figured it would be. I rather liked it. As others have mentioned, Quantum of Solace continues the grittier Bond feel from Casino Royale. This, I think, goes hand-in-hand with the lack of gadgets some posters have complained of; the point of the post-reboot Bond films seems to have been to de-emphasize the technological deus-ex-machinae of the Brosnan-era Bond films in favor of recasting Bond as the sort of dutybound quasi-sociopath you would actually have to be to do the work a 00 agent does. See,e.g, the opening scene and the machete fight scene from Casino Royale. Overall, I like the change; if not in a James Bond purist way, then simply from the standpoint of good story telling. My only real complaint about the film was that the camera work is too clever by half at a few points "are they just walking out of the opera? is it a gunfight? oh God!"  . Otherwise, Quantum of Solace is a very solid follow up on Casino Royale.4.5/5 Aegis fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Nov 16, 2008 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2008 05:17
|
|
|
This was much more of an old-timey "Bond" movie than Casino Royale, and to be quite honest it suffers for it. The title was weak, let's just get that out of the way. Yes it ties into the plot fairly nicely in a few ways but it's just got too much of that "Tomorrow Never Dies" silliness. The theme was pretty adequate if forgettable, but the video it was coupled with was very nice, even if I really wanted it to have more to do with the movie like CR's did rather than just being crazy pretty poo poo. Let's start with the characters. Bond is no longer the junior 00 Agent he was in Casino Royale, stumbling around making a bloody mess but with moments of lucid brilliance that showed off his true potential; this time he enters into the movie (almost) fully formed, a rampaging superhuman killing machine who blasts his way through every (very impressive) fight scene and has a way out of every scrape. Daniel Craig is obviously very grateful for the chance at this role and he fits it perfectly. The main Bond girl (for there are two) is perfectly adequate and probably quite likeable, there's just not that much to her. You go through the movie expecting her to be hugely relevant to James's future in the manner of Vesper Lynd, but at the end it turns out she is actually just in it for revenge on the secondary villain, General Medrano. There's no big twist, she just goes her merry way. This was a little dissapointing, but I suppose reflective of where Bond now finds himself. I can't remember her name. Of a Bond girl? Come on. The second Bond girl is incredibly likeable and much more old-timey Bond girl, right down to her distractingly disturbing death. There are a few very nice nods to older movies in this film, and this was the most obvious of the lot. Judi Dench really needs to be kept in the role of M until she falls over and dies, she's just that capable. You get the feeling her wounding commentary on Bond's escapades is starting to pile up and get through to Bond. You also see a lot more of what M does whenever she isn't telling Bond what a mess he's making, which as it turns out is telling someone else what a mess he's making. Matthew Almaric is as good as he ever is at playing a Frenchman in American movies, which is, after being told to tone up his French accent by the director, wisely tones it down again whenever the camera is rolling. I quite like that Mr Green is very much not a hands-on villain; whereas even Le Chiffre is willing to get his hands dirty if he's sure of getting results, Green is obviously a diplomat, a middleman, who deals in threats and promises and who, thanks to his place in Quantum, is only ever thoroughly cornered when you remove him completely from the machine. Quantum itself wasn't touched on with as much focus as I'd like. Yes we find out that they're there and everywhere, the first turn being a remarkably good one, but we don't know what they're really up to rather than the quite silly and abstract plan to steal Bolivia's water. Noone also seriously suspects that Bond is going to foul up against the secondary villain, we really could have done with a lot less time dealing with him and his schemes. White and Green also appear less threatening in this movie, which is dissapointing. General Medrano, the deposed ruler of Bolivia is suitably vile but also a complete one-dimensional oaf. There are quite a few good revelations about who works for Quantum however, which can be doubtless stretched into a few movies now. The cast from the previous movie including Mathis are handled reverentially, being given almost too much screen time, although one gets the feeling that Felix Leiter is only there to show that they haven't changed the actor playing him (don't change the actor playing him) and to allow for one potentially important line of dialogue by M at the end of the movie. There is one particularly terrible casting error: Mr Beam, the head of the CIA. For someone in his position he looks and acts like the manager of a highschool football team. On top of this, someone apparently told him that Ron Burgundy was a good look for the head of the CIA. I must bring up that this film is beautifully shot: every landscape shot is sumptious and distinct from anything in most other movies, aside from the airplane chase, which looked like it was shot in Arizona. The main set that I was unhappy with was MI6 itself, which saw a return to more gadgety-Minority Report-touchscreen nonsense which did nothing that could not be done on any laptop, and surely that would have been more realistic. There are a lot of very good scenes in this film. The opening chase scene is fantastic, as are the post-intro interrogation, reveal and extended rooftop chase and fight. Probably capping them all though are Bond's scenes with Mathis; Giannini does magnificently well as a man trying his best to deal with a rather large grudge and remain professional and warm at the same time. Forget Bond's little trists with what's-her-face; this relationship is the emotinal heart of the movie. There is the odd fluff by Marc Foster, who just doesn't feel as confident as Martin Campbell and veers into old-Bond silliness too often the touchscreens, the incredibly esoteric "eye-opening" opera scene revealing Quantum, "IbelieveyouandIhadamutualfriend!" but it's certainly it's own movie and strong enough to keep me interested in where they are taking Bond next. I just think that if this were released back in 2006 instead of Casino Royale we probably wouldn't have been so excited about seeing the next big Bond now. 3.5/5 Nilbop fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Nov 22, 2008 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2008 15:32
|
|
|
As a Bond fan I was excited about what they had done with the franchise in "Casino Royale". They had done away with the silliness and unintelligible action sequences from "Die Another Day" and produced one of the best Bond films ever. Unfortunately, someone did not get the note and they may as well have hired Halle Berry again for this one, that's what a turd "Quantum" was. The major shortcoming was in the direction and editing. I don't really expect the story to be super coherent in a Bond film, nor do I expect Oscar caliber performances out of the cast. In this regard I was satisfied with Quantum. The story was kind of stupid, and there were moments of heavy handed narrative, but overall I feel that it was passable. I do, however, expect not to need Dramamine to view the film. The action sequences were so muddled and the camera so shaky that it was actually distracting in the non-action scenes. I spent half the movie dreading the next action sequence, and my suspicion of looming nausea proven correct when each one inevitably arrived. I suppose if I was a 13 year old with ADD and wanted sweet explosions I would love Quantum, but I'm not. Shaky camera tricks and quick cut editing to imply chaos is just weak film making. Bond deserves better and so do his fans. 2/5
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2008 23:35
|
|
|
I like the direction Daniel Craig is carrying Bond, even if the action scenes could have been cleaner. Dench definitely kept me interested despite the sparsity of meaningful dialogue, and the moment at the end when you see the Canadian agent's happiness wither away in a matter of sentences was a nice touch as well. This movie, for me, was a matter of waiting through the segue. 3.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2008 17:47
|
|
|
Casino Royale was a 5 for me, in fact I think it was the best bond film ever. I was hoping for good things in Quantum of Solace because it was setup as a sequel, but it didnt deliver. Basically it was to fast and confusing, I didnt really know what was going on. As the OP said it was too much like Borne Identity etc, Oceons 11, Mission Impossible, flashback work out the plot type films, if they are done well like Fight Club or 12 Monkeys they kick arse but if they dont capture you then you are just left a bit confused watching things blow up. 2/5.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 22:15
|
|
|
Quantum of Solace Directed by Marc Forster Written by Paul Haggis and Neal Purvis & Robert Wade Starring Daniel Craig as James Bond Olga Kurylenko as Camille Mathieu Amalric as Dominic Greene After the less-than-inspiring Die Another Day, the Bond producers announced that they would in effect, "reboot" the franchise, and use the one Ian Fleming novel not yet used in an official picture: "Casino Royale." Film goers were initially skeptical of the idea of returning to the basics of Bond. But the producers knew they had the right idea after seeing the success of films such as The Bourne Identity and The Bourne Supremacy, which also ascribed to the idea of a realistic espionage tale. Thus, Casino Royale was born. By all accounts, Casino Royale was a smash success. So it was decided to repeat what had made it great. Unfortunately, where its predecessor succeeded, Quantum of Solace fails. The film is unsure about whether it wants to be a traditional Bond oeuvre, with spectacular world-wide locations, beautiful women, car chases, gun fights, and explosions, and a world-wide organization that operates above the law for its own ends; or a down-to-Earth spy thriller with a fallible hero, scarred allies, and an evil plot that is not nearly as imaginative as previous plots. The film begins where the previous film left off: James Bond (Daniel Craig) has captured the operator of a global organization, Mr. White (Jesper Christensen), and is bringing him in for questioning. But all hell breaks loose when one of the agents brought in by M (Judi Dench) reveals himself as a spy for the organization by freeing Mr. White. Bond eventually tracks down an almost-cold trail to Haiti where he encounters Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a man who all-but-flaunts his involvement with this global organization while Bond steals his girlfriend, Camille (Olga Kurylenko). Bond tracks him through a few different countries, eventually encountering Camille again while they discover Greene's comparatively small-yet-taken-as-dangerous plan, involving CIA complicity in Bolivia, to which Bond's pal Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) is privy too, yet still disgusted by. Daniel Craig still acts wonderfully as a man torn between continuing a mission because of duty or because of revenge. Amalric plays a slimy yet smarmy foe but without any noticeable features, unfortunately the script doesn't give him much to work with. It's a wonder that Amalric's Greene is as creepy as he is. As usual, Dench's M lights up the screen as a cold yet caring chief. The James Bond series is known for, among other things, its thrilling action scenes. To date, there hasn't been an official James Bond feature that has been poorly made, and Quantum of Solace is no exception. Unfortunately, the director may have been inspired by the Bourne series too much. Throughout most of the action scenes, involving either car chases or foot chases, we are at a loss to understand what is going on. If there's one thing the Bond action sequences are known for, it's their coherency: the directors generally find a balance somewhere between standing back and allowing us to involve ourself in the action. Unfortunately, this one goes too far to the latter; we experience everything in greater-than-real-time, the action is too hyper, and by the time we can guess what's happened, it feels as if an entire act has gone by. There is one scene where the camera work is clever, but at this point, it's too clever for its own good, and we're left with a visual mess where we can't figure out the pieces. Not surprising, since the second unit director also worked on the Bourne films in the same capacity. Nevertheless, I hope that this entry is just suffering from middle-of-a-trilogy syndrome, since it definitely sets up for a longer showdown with Quantum, the global syndicate, and Daniel Craig proves that he can be a spectacular multi-faceted Bond from a heartfelt good-bye to a scene where he practically infects the audience with his particular smirk. Final Rating: 3/5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2009 23:40
|
|
|
Quantum of Solace (2008)  Bond: Daniel Craig The Evil Mastermind: Mathieu Amalric as the exceedingly anemic Dominic Greene. The Henchperson: Nobody! The Bond Girl: Olga Kurylenko as the attractive Camille Montes Director: Marc Forster Scripting: Haggis and Purvis IMDB:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0830515/ Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4jY8WxcFMo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4jY8WxcFMo There's little doubt that the current reboot of Bond is directly related to the success of the Jason Bourne series. Bourne had shown us that things aren't black and white, and corruption within an organization can be an even more threatening enemy than any villain previously faced. The Bond series has dabbled in this concept on occasion, but never with the success of the aforementioned amnesic CIA agent. Every time Bond goes rogue, it's never for real, and it's never more than a few moments on film. When Bourne is hunted, everyone goes after him, because there is so much to lose if he stays alive. When Bond goes rogue, he's met up with a beautiful girl who politley asks him to get on a plane, and go back to London. The quintessential problem of Bond is this - How do you endanger the indestructible man? The first issue I had with this movie was just how much of the movie was copied almost directly from Bourne Ultimatum. CIA internal corruption. The handheld filming syle. Two agents on opposite sides racing across dusty rooftops in persuit of each other. Fights that involve using the most primal of weapons that mirror the scenes in Bourne a little to closely that you wonder if they might be guilty of trademark infringement. Fight scenes that are disorienting and a little hard to follow. Casino Royale could be "inspired" by Matt Damon's counterpart, but Quantum of Solace is taking this homage to apish proportions. Although I don't need Bond to be "the old 007", he does have to have something to set him apart from that rogue agent from the CIA.  "Who's going to be the one to tell Marc the camera's upside down?" The second issue is the way that M (always) deals with Bond's running wild. I understand that there is a certain admiration between Bond and M, and as such, she lets him get away with poo poo that no one else could ever try, but once a "capture or kill" order is issued, I don't think it is the type of responsibility she can lightly sweep under the rug. Really, what are the writers afraid of here? I want to see all of the 00 Agents get activated with a kill order on Bond. I want to see fights to the death between these agents. I don't worry about the illogic of it all, because there is always a Deus Ex Machina to fix everything anway, and letting Bond get away with killing or maiming a few agents can't be any worse of a plothole than what happens here anyway. It's Bond, for God's sake, stop sending pussified field agents who can't even get their gun out of their holster before they are face down in a pool of blood. The third issue is the general lack of focus of the plot. The story meanders about like a lost child and cuminates in a illogical conclusion that leaves you confused and not particularily interested in the outcome. With the end of an era of meglomaniacs planning the destruction of life on earth, we come to a script that is much more realistic, and embroiled in interesting politics, but once you take away the grandeur of it all, a great deal of effort needs to be spent on creating a tight story that focuses on character interaction shaken well with a side of intrigue, or you run the danger of being periously close to being less interesting than an average hour of c-span, and drier than a Bolivian desert.  "Are you kidding? Do you remember the last person that corrected him?" There is good in this movie, though. I like the way the movie picks up literally 10 min. after the last one, without taking a break. And the most important factor is the re-introduction of Spectre, which for legal reasons will be referred to as Quantum from now on. And then there is Craig, who is turning out to be dependable in his representation of Bond in his latest raw incarnation, although it's fair to say he more of a "blunt instrument" as M calls him than a spy who looks like he could actually get the drop on someone. There are a few moments that catch you off guard, like the way Bond deals with Mathis after an unfortunate occurance. These moments further define Bond as being human, and yet inhuman in the same breath, seemingly illogical, yet perfect for what he is. Equally curious is the way that he deals with the Vesper's previous boyfriend. Bond, like the main story, is alone in a barren wasteland of contradictions. In the end, Quantum of Solace perfectly represents Hollywood in so many ways. Movies are not so much art as they are big business. Despite record downloads of movies, the film industry made more money in the last year than ever before*. The Bond series has always been about trying to capitalize on whatever is currently popular, but it's never been quite as obvious as this film has been. Part of this may have been due to the writer's strike causing a rough draft to end up being the final script, and as such, no time to make attempt to copy Bourne less obvious. It's ok to borrow what worked in Bourne, but you have to make enough changes to make the movie stand out on it's own. Bond needs to be...Bond.  "That would be Olga...good thing Marc finished shooting all of her scenes first." The Good: Further development of Bond's character and the new Spectre. Keeping with more realistic Bond. Beautiful Cinematography. The Bad: Illogical elements and meandering storyline. Almost zero character development. Too close to Bourne. The Ugly: Camille's back in a low cut dress. FINAL SCORE As a Bond Flick:   As a movie in general: Bizarre afterthought: Mr. White, now Mr. Greene...where's Mr. Pink? * http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/091210/entertainment/centertainment_us_boxoffice , etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2009 06:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 10:15 |
|
|
I've heard plenty of negative comments on this film, and after finally watching it I've made up an opinion. It's quite straightforward, an action movie with a stale-old plot from an old McGuyver's episode. If you love shakey-cam "gritty" chase sequences you're in for a treat. Leave it to hollywood to cast an ukranian model to pose in as a bolivian intelligence agent. 3/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 17:08
|
|
