User Score
6.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 488 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 75 out of 488
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Cory
    Nov 16, 2008
    2
    Stereotypical action movie-200 hundred guys with machine guns shooting at the main character and nobody can hit him! Even worse, there are way too many characters without introductions that confuse you all movie.
  2. AlexC.
    Nov 17, 2008
    3
    Worst Bond film ever based on many facts: no character development, no depth to the plot, very plain action sequences (with many borrowed from previous films) and way too many loose ends. It seems like all the good scenes were edited out to leave this skeleton with no meat for a story. Wait for video.
  3. James
    Nov 28, 2008
    2
    Extremely poor plot and very far fetched, even for a bond flick. The director expects us to believe bond miraculously survives multiple certain death situations with giving even a hint as to how. I had hopes that the bond franchise had wisened up given a more human nature of casino royale, but they have gone terribly of the rails this time around.
  4. CiaranG
    Jun 29, 2009
    6
    With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats, planes and fast cars but with no explanation... Also, for the first time, I get the feeling that this James Bond is as bad as the other villains! With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats, planes and fast cars but with no explanation... Also, for the first time, I get the feeling that this James Bond is as bad as the other villains! James Bond is supposed to be the hero, not the revenge-seeking murderous d*ck. Action scenes are fun to watch and they happen in a good variety of locations around the world - this is all that saves this film. Expand
  5. JakeH.
    Nov 15, 2008
    2
    Piss poor.
  6. JamesBond
    Dec 10, 2008
    0
    Village Voice has it right - this was edited in a blender set on indecipherable. Utter garbage. Give me Brosnan or any other Bond for that matter. The director should never be allowed to work again.
  7. Nov 20, 2012
    5
    This movie is a toss-up since License to Kill. A corny and weak plot so unimaginable winds up being concentrated on something else. Also the movie is short despite five good action scenes and there's nothing else special in this one.
  8. Oct 24, 2011
    7
    The plot is just slightly too complex to follow, the Bond-girls aren't quite as stunning, and the writing is not quite as polished as its predecessor. "Quantum"'s primary problem is that it had to follow "Casino Royale". A moderately-fun action movie, an adequate addition to the Bond franchise, but a below-average sequel. Regardless, it's still worth a look. Maybe even two or three.
  9. Jun 13, 2011
    7
    Not up there with Casino Royale but a great follow up to it. The acting was still great but the movie rushed through its self a little bit. Daniel Craig still does a good job and makes me forget about that Pierce guy. Overall a very good movie.
  10. CutScene
    Apr 4, 2009
    5
    The most action-oriented Bond movie that I can remember seeing. I don't have a problem with that, but I do have a problem with the way the scenes were done. I literally can't watch the action scenes in the movie. I get so frustrated by following whats going on through the cut-scene-orama that it makes me angry. Did anyone who made this movie actually watch it when they were The most action-oriented Bond movie that I can remember seeing. I don't have a problem with that, but I do have a problem with the way the scenes were done. I literally can't watch the action scenes in the movie. I get so frustrated by following whats going on through the cut-scene-orama that it makes me angry. Did anyone who made this movie actually watch it when they were done? That was a rhetorical question because the answer is obvious. No. My advice - dont drink 26 cups of coffee before you edit the next Bond movie. Thanks. Expand
  11. RichardS
    Dec 10, 2008
    0
    The worst Bond film of all time. I thought nothing could be worse than Die Another Day. This manages it with some aplomb. The direction is horrible - all split second jump cuts designed to create excitement and stimulate action. It does nothing of the sort, only creating a sense of nausea. The story is boring and flat. Give me back the megalomaniac who wants world control and save me from The worst Bond film of all time. I thought nothing could be worse than Die Another Day. This manages it with some aplomb. The direction is horrible - all split second jump cuts designed to create excitement and stimulate action. It does nothing of the sort, only creating a sense of nausea. The story is boring and flat. Give me back the megalomaniac who wants world control and save me from these weary eco-stories. This has NOTHING in common with any Bond film. No sexiness, no gadgets, no exciting villain, no villain's lair, no henchman, no decent theme, no John Barry music, no intro, no nothing. The worst Bond film or all time, maybe one of the worst films of the year. Expand
  12. JaredJ
    Mar 25, 2009
    0
    Okay, after the horrid "Casino Royale," I thought that this was going to be a lot cleaner. It wasn't. The clasic "Gun barrel" opening was tossed away to the end of the film and done with horrorfying results. Bond is no longer an Agent he is a midless killing machine. Oh and if this is still part of 007's first mission EVER WHY THE *@!$ IS IT IN MODERN TIMES?! After "Die Another Okay, after the horrid "Casino Royale," I thought that this was going to be a lot cleaner. It wasn't. The clasic "Gun barrel" opening was tossed away to the end of the film and done with horrorfying results. Bond is no longer an Agent he is a midless killing machine. Oh and if this is still part of 007's first mission EVER WHY THE *@!$ IS IT IN MODERN TIMES?! After "Die Another Day" we no longer get to see what Bond's next adventure is the re did the whole thing with crappy decisions! No story, tons of action that is poorly developed and RIPS off of Classic bond films! "Goldfinger" is in here but rip offed of it as well as "GoldenEye," "Thunderball," and "Live and Let Die" It has the Bond movie title and logo but it is NOT a Bond film, complete garbage. Expand
  13. SteveC
    Apr 16, 2009
    1
    What a dismal Bond movie. It had none of the character development or plot of the last one. Purely two-dimensional. On top of that, the actions scenes are shot in the increasingly popular super-close style that makes it so you can't tell what's actually going on. I frequently couldn't determine which black car or black suit was chasing the other. Overall, profoundly disappointing.
  14. BenjaminG.
    Nov 20, 2008
    3
    Just another Action Movie, not Bond anymore.
  15. GrantH.
    Nov 5, 2008
    2
    Unfortunately this film couldn't be saved by the awesomeness of Daniel Craig in the role of Bond. It just couldn't overcome the poor, messy script or the shaky 'what the hell is actually happening' camerawork. Worst of all though was the useless bad guy. He just never felt sinister enough for a Bond villain. Absolute shite unfortunately. Here's hoping that the Unfortunately this film couldn't be saved by the awesomeness of Daniel Craig in the role of Bond. It just couldn't overcome the poor, messy script or the shaky 'what the hell is actually happening' camerawork. Worst of all though was the useless bad guy. He just never felt sinister enough for a Bond villain. Absolute shite unfortunately. Here's hoping that the next Bond is closer to the standard set by Casino Royale. Expand
  16. EricO.
    Dec 6, 2008
    3
    I've literally just returned from watching this Bond movie, and while walking out of the theater, my dad commented on what he considered to be the lame plot. Listen- no one should go to a Bond movie expecting a coherent plotline; in fact, they've never had coherent plotlines. Honestly, Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Connery and I don't think anyone can seriously I've literally just returned from watching this Bond movie, and while walking out of the theater, my dad commented on what he considered to be the lame plot. Listen- no one should go to a Bond movie expecting a coherent plotline; in fact, they've never had coherent plotlines. Honestly, Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Connery and I don't think anyone can seriously dispute that. The girls in QOS are perfectly acceptable and the locales are exotic, as should be expected. The major flaw with this film is the quick-cut method and hand-held camera work used by the director during action sequences. Stuntmen were injured while making this Bond film, Craig lost part of his finger during an action sequence, but damned if you can tell what's going on at any point while the action takes place. As Bond films are all about the action sequences, the quick-editing and shaky hand-held camerawork destroys a good portion of the film as a whole. Expand
  17. DanS
    Jan 10, 2009
    4
    Plot, editing, and acting aside, I'm surprised no one seems to be complaining about the rapid-fire attempted rapes near the end. I'm not a huge Bond fan, but part of the fun of these movies is the cartoonishness. Moon-based lasers? Fun. Slightly disturbing brutality? Not so much.
  18. GeorgeM
    Apr 6, 2009
    8
    Bond is back again...and Craig is on his second film playing everyone's favorite spy. Quantum picks up alsmot immediately after the events of the Casino Royale...so there is little time to get ready for this film, because it starts out "balls to the wall" and rarely lets up till the big explosive finale. In comparison to the first (Casino Royale), Quantum of Solace lacks a Bond is back again...and Craig is on his second film playing everyone's favorite spy. Quantum picks up alsmot immediately after the events of the Casino Royale...so there is little time to get ready for this film, because it starts out "balls to the wall" and rarely lets up till the big explosive finale. In comparison to the first (Casino Royale), Quantum of Solace lacks a bit...whether it be the story the directorial style...nothing about this film seems as elegant or as well put together as its predecessor...it definately amps up the action a few notches however. The action scenes better choreographed and far more explosive...so it certainly excedes Casino in that regard. It's really the story and lack of substance that make this film a bit ho-hum at times...its just not interesting to follow, something about a greedy enviromentalist on the hunt for oil and he isn't afraid to lie and kill to get what he wants and then this even less important story about a girl trying to get revenge on a general for brutally killing her family (yawn)...but you really won't care about any of that, it almost seems like filler until you get to the real meat of what this movie is about...ACTION and lots of it, as its easy to see where most of the care went. Casino Royale is a far more polished Bond film...Quantum is certainly watchable and its actually quite entertaining as a hollow action film, it dosent seem to really expand on the Bond character other than we know he is even MORE upset and far more lethal in his methods now than before. it comes HIGHLY RECOMMENDED...if you are looking for action, this is it, if you are looking for story....i strongy recommend you watch Casino Royale to catch up. Expand
  19. EmanT
    May 4, 2009
    1
    Never before has there been such abuse of the name bond. All those years theve spent building a franchise only to have this aboination to come along. The story was week and confussing, the fighting was good but covereing a girl in oil??? Come up with an orginal idea rather than stealing from other bond films. Everyone envovled is a turd. End of.
  20. AlexH
    May 7, 2009
    0
    A horrible film consisting of no plot, no story, no acting and no sense. James Bond is not a action hero, get that straight Hollywood, and next time actually try to make a new Bond film a good one and a memorable one. "Quantum of Solace" is one of the worst of 2008.
  21. sk
    Nov 23, 2008
    3
    Very very poor bond movie. Bad story, and honestly quite a boring movie to watch. Makes the awesome Casino Royale look like a classic.
  22. DougR
    Feb 7, 2009
    3
    Pitiful Bond movie. The last two are a real let down. No super spy gadgets, cars, etc. Just blow 'em away brutality. A raw film that rubbed me raw. In attempting to make super spying into some gritty, hardcore killer flick, the writers have fallen prey to a neverland that would have the 00 spies bouncing off their asylum walls. Way over the top without the fantasy gadgets...too much Pitiful Bond movie. The last two are a real let down. No super spy gadgets, cars, etc. Just blow 'em away brutality. A raw film that rubbed me raw. In attempting to make super spying into some gritty, hardcore killer flick, the writers have fallen prey to a neverland that would have the 00 spies bouncing off their asylum walls. Way over the top without the fantasy gadgets...too much unreal realism. What can I say to some it up? It was a real downer. Redeeming lines within the thing about forgiveness...that was good. Expand
  23. MichelleS
    Mar 28, 2009
    3
    I really did not enjoy this movie at all. I gave it a 3 because, for an action movie it had some cool action sequences. I didn't care for any of the actors in the movie either. I didn't care for the story.
  24. AnthonyF
    Jul 16, 2009
    5
    Never have I been this critical with any Bond film. The Man with the Golden Gun was pretty bad, but this one was just off the charts. Never have I seen a Bond film suffer from an identity crisis this bad. The film is a mess. The screeplay's a mess, the action scenes are a mess and even the climax is a mess. I don't think James Bond needed to be restarted, I think he needed a Never have I been this critical with any Bond film. The Man with the Golden Gun was pretty bad, but this one was just off the charts. Never have I seen a Bond film suffer from an identity crisis this bad. The film is a mess. The screeplay's a mess, the action scenes are a mess and even the climax is a mess. I don't think James Bond needed to be restarted, I think he needed a good screenplay thrown his way. Collapse
  25. Nov 26, 2011
    8
    Daniel Craig is good in this film once again. The action sequences are good and film in general is good as well but not as great as the previous fim. I still enjoyed it though.
  26. Nov 10, 2011
    10
    I am a huge Bond fan. I have read the Flemming novels and I have seen all movies. Quantum of Solace is my favourite Bond movie by a mile.
    It has everything that you could want from a bond film. Awesome action, excellent acting, hot Bond girls, a realistic plot and a realistic villain with a genius plan. The car chase and fight scene are better shot and easier to follow than anything in the
    I am a huge Bond fan. I have read the Flemming novels and I have seen all movies. Quantum of Solace is my favourite Bond movie by a mile.
    It has everything that you could want from a bond film. Awesome action, excellent acting, hot Bond girls, a realistic plot and a realistic villain with a genius plan. The car chase and fight scene are better shot and easier to follow than anything in the Bourne films. They're hard hitting and thrilling to watch.
    It pays homage to most of the great early movies like Goldfinger and The Spy Who Loved Me.
    Sean Connery played Bond just like the character in the Flemming novels but Daniel Craig is by far the best actor to ever portray Bond. He looks classy and he kicks ass when he needs to. Highly recommended.
    Expand
  27. LawrenceT
    May 5, 2009
    9
    This movie could have had some of the best action sequences. But it lacked that and lacked the charm which you would expext from a bond. Daniel is making the franchise fall because everywoman he sleeps with dies. He should have had a bond with no sequels. But this film puts the hype and has more action which I like and I loved this movie because we saw something new instead of all the This movie could have had some of the best action sequences. But it lacked that and lacked the charm which you would expext from a bond. Daniel is making the franchise fall because everywoman he sleeps with dies. He should have had a bond with no sequels. But this film puts the hype and has more action which I like and I loved this movie because we saw something new instead of all the James Bond movies. He is not trying to save the world and he is just out for revenge. Expand
  28. tomp
    Dec 10, 2008
    9
    Ignore the critics, this is one of the best bond films ever.
  29. MD
    Jul 22, 2009
    8
    My family and I were extremely disappointed in "Casino Royale" and after watching it again, I still can't figure out how it got any good reviews. "Quantum of Solace" on the other hand was much more enjoyable and DC finally starts to act more like James Bond rather than the thug he was in the previous movie. This movie is not perfect, but it was entertaining and it gives me hope that My family and I were extremely disappointed in "Casino Royale" and after watching it again, I still can't figure out how it got any good reviews. "Quantum of Solace" on the other hand was much more enjoyable and DC finally starts to act more like James Bond rather than the thug he was in the previous movie. This movie is not perfect, but it was entertaining and it gives me hope that this "reinvented" Bond is evolving into someone we can like again. Expand
  30. SM
    Dec 30, 2008
    4
    Although Quantum of Solace was kind of a continuation to Casino Royal, the latter was at least ten times more thrilling and thought-provoking than the former, and I guess this pretty much explains why everyone is disappointed with this new Bond movie. However, there is still enough excitement to watch it once.
  31. TomH
    Mar 24, 2009
    6
    Spectacular scenes and good rhythm.
  32. TonyH
    May 8, 2009
    8
    I enjoy the way Daniel Craig interprets his Bond character and really appreciate that there is less focus on the "gadgetry" than in all the Bond movies. I really get a sense that this Bond cares about what and why he does what he does for a living.
  33. JayH
    Mar 22, 2009
    7
    It has all the right ingredients for a Bond flick - rapid pace, plenty of explosions, car chases, great special effects, great international settings and over the top action. Not the best of the Bond films, but it works. Very entertaining, outstanding production values.
  34. tankj
    Dec 11, 2008
    8
    I'm not sure why everyone wants to see the same cheesy Bond movie. Craig is the best bond yet (sorry Sean). The action in this movie is spectacular. It is not quite as good as Casino Royale but still very good.
  35. Aug 22, 2010
    7
    Tooooo short and not enough lighter/comedic moments. All bond does is go around shooting people and then doesn't even kill the one guy at the end. The action was good besides the shaky camera which I personally don't like. Not really a good bond movie but a decent action movie.
  36. Aug 24, 2010
    7
    Daniel Craig's second outing as 007.
    BIG set pieces, lots of carnage (Bond seems to wreck every location he goes to), fast, furious & slightly silly.
    Bit of a mess this one & doesn't really hold together as the brilliant Casino Royale did. Craig is fine & basically an emotionless maniac which, considering his profession, is what he'd be. Nice perfomances also by Olga Kurylenko (Blimey
    Daniel Craig's second outing as 007.
    BIG set pieces, lots of carnage (Bond seems to wreck every location he goes to), fast, furious & slightly silly.
    Bit of a mess this one & doesn't really hold together as the brilliant Casino Royale did.
    Craig is fine & basically an emotionless maniac which, considering his profession, is what he'd be.
    Nice perfomances also by Olga Kurylenko (Blimey Charlie!!) & the great but under-used Giancarlo Giannini.
    The bad guys aren't as a prominent as other films but it's still a damn sight better than any of the awful Pierce Brosnan films.
    Expand
  37. Oct 8, 2011
    7
    This movie had a lot of action. Aside that I had no clue what the story was. I never liked this actor as James Bond either. It was not worth sitting through but the action was packed.
  38. May 10, 2013
    8
    It may not be edited perfectly or nearly three-quarters as well-crafted as its predecessor, but "Quantum Of Solace" still stands tall as a thrillingly engrossing Bond film.
  39. AlbertS.
    Nov 14, 2008
    7
    The beggining of the film, which had hardly any dialogue, felt like you were trying to get a story out of a kid with ADD. It was confusing, and it wasn't until about 1/3 of the film in that things start making sense and the movie gets better. Overall the movie lacks class, that Bond factor that sets it apart from other action movies. The dialogue lacks wit, the plot lacks substance, The beggining of the film, which had hardly any dialogue, felt like you were trying to get a story out of a kid with ADD. It was confusing, and it wasn't until about 1/3 of the film in that things start making sense and the movie gets better. Overall the movie lacks class, that Bond factor that sets it apart from other action movies. The dialogue lacks wit, the plot lacks substance, and the movie felt like it needed about another half hour to properly explain what was going on. The villains helped the movie for me because they were evil, but not absurdly so. It would have a higher score if it wasn't for the overdone, drawn out action sequences that hilighted how underdeveloped the rest of the movie was. Expand
  40. TabU.
    Nov 15, 2008
    8
    One of the more emotionally, intellectually stimulating espionage Bond movies to date! Technology is thrown out and the brutal human component of the spy game, the way it was meant to be was lobbed back in to great effect. Except for first to risky action sequences that had potential but failed, overall this movie rocked.
  41. [Anonymous]
    Oct 30, 2008
    9
    Hey, seems to me I've already read one underwhelming review, but I liked this it ot. I was not wowed by the first Daniel Craig as Bond effort but seems like the new director has tuned it just right: gritty and well shot w/just the right touch of emotion. Enjoy.
  42. PhilipC.
    Aug 5, 2008
    10
    Bond is back and better than Ever! The action is amazing, the whole story is very continual and relative to Casino royale. But this one was much better. It's just amazing. See it for yourself. I saw a SC.
  43. JohnW.
    Nov 1, 2008
    8
    A further step away from the formulaic previous Bond entries and all the better for it. It doesn't have the charm and strong storyline that Casion Royale did but it's still a strong film. It is probably the most 'un-Bond' like film in the whole series save for OHMSS, as it avoids many of the signature features of the previous entries. Daniel Craig is on top form as are A further step away from the formulaic previous Bond entries and all the better for it. It doesn't have the charm and strong storyline that Casion Royale did but it's still a strong film. It is probably the most 'un-Bond' like film in the whole series save for OHMSS, as it avoids many of the signature features of the previous entries. Daniel Craig is on top form as are the surrounding cast. Expand
  44. Manny
    Nov 14, 2008
    9
    This is an exceptional movie. But beware, it is a shift away from the traditional, cheesy lined Bond movie towards a darker, richer story. Craig's acting is on par, if not better than Casino Royale. I can't comprehend how reviewers trash this movie for its austerity and lack of "campiness". It wouldn't make sense to follow the typical formula for Quantum. In addition to the This is an exceptional movie. But beware, it is a shift away from the traditional, cheesy lined Bond movie towards a darker, richer story. Craig's acting is on par, if not better than Casino Royale. I can't comprehend how reviewers trash this movie for its austerity and lack of "campiness". It wouldn't make sense to follow the typical formula for Quantum. In addition to the psychological trauma from Vesper Lynd's death, Bond suffers numerous other cataclysms in the movie. To simply "grin" and move on, as some reviewers suggested, wouldn't be appropriate -it would actually be quite distracting. Again I have to emphasize, this movie is remarkable, if this is a sign for what's to come from this franchise, count me in. As for those reviewers who trashed the movie, I suggest they "grin" and move on. Expand
  45. David
    Nov 15, 2008
    9
    You people who are stuck on the old James Bond need to get over it! The old gadgets and sex and just plain sillyness is gone! Here and now in the last couple of movies we have had a real person that is believable. No out of control camera movement, good action that is believable (well, most of it) and still the good looking women! This was a very good movie and i love the fact that it You people who are stuck on the old James Bond need to get over it! The old gadgets and sex and just plain sillyness is gone! Here and now in the last couple of movies we have had a real person that is believable. No out of control camera movement, good action that is believable (well, most of it) and still the good looking women! This was a very good movie and i love the fact that it followed the story of the last. Give it a try! Expand
  46. AndrewR.
    Nov 15, 2008
    4
    Ok but pales next to Casino Royale. Way too frenetic and needed plot help.
  47. ChadS.
    Nov 15, 2008
    6
    Cracked windshield. The black sports car is vulnerable. Like its driver, you see the mileage, you see the wear-and-tear. The superagent doesn't give a s*** if he lives or dies. Both man and machine aren't subjected to the same fetishisms of past James Bond movies. They're wrecks. Cracked windshield. Cracked man. "Quantum of Solace" is another killjoy, as was 2006's Cracked windshield. The black sports car is vulnerable. Like its driver, you see the mileage, you see the wear-and-tear. The superagent doesn't give a s*** if he lives or dies. Both man and machine aren't subjected to the same fetishisms of past James Bond movies. They're wrecks. Cracked windshield. Cracked man. "Quantum of Solace" is another killjoy, as was 2006's "Casino Royale". The Aston Martin needs a mechanic. Bond needs a shrink: somebody to cure his vertigo(the filmmaker references the 1958 Alfred Hitchcock film starring Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak). At times, "Quantum of Solace" feels so different from the patented tropes of past Bond movies, those of the Cubby Broccoli orthodoxy may want Daniel Craig to reorientate us and say the line, that corny line of formal introduction to reassure the true believers of the superagent's 007-ness. "Quantum of Solace" will appeal to an audience who takes its cheese seriously; who believes a film like Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" is the epitiome of sophistication, just because everybody is so damn glum. The irony behind this new breed of un-Cubby-like James Bond movies(it's sort of like eating broccoli) is that in trying to transcend its genre roots, "Quantum of Solace" tries on another genre for size: the science fiction genre. Craig rewrites the book on the Ian Fleming creation so completely, old-time fans may claim, "That's not him." This sober Bond does indeed seem to be a double, like something out of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". Political subtext(or sociological subtext, or both), so prevalent in the 1956 original(and the 1978 Phillip Kaufman remake), is prevalent here, too. This accidental "Body Snatchers" remake demonstrates how Democrats, in our current political arena, act more like Moderate Republicans than Liberals. They're friendly to big business, too. Dominic Greene(Mathieu Amalric), the CEO of a supposed eco-friendly corporation, puts on a populist face at fundraisers, but when nobody's looking, he's just another cold-hearted businessman who puts people behind profit. Being both French and an environmentalist makes Greene an amalgamation of Al Gore and John Kerry. Give me a villain like Jaws(Richard Kiel from "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker") who simply wanted to kill James, not a community of Bolivians, and above all else, our fun. Expand
  48. RolandB.
    Nov 15, 2008
    10
    I liked it more than Casino...and that is regardless of the action being better.
  49. August
    Nov 15, 2008
    8
    Not as bad as some of you say, and it's NOT Bourne.
  50. Orson
    Nov 16, 2008
    4
    This Bond sucks as surprisingly as Casino surpassed expectations. The problem? In a first, the action sequences have no rhyme, rythym, or reason. Truly, the first such Bond picture in which these are panful and ineffective to watch. Frustrating viewing. he non-action scenes are actually economical gems, but far too brief to enjoy as Bondian. I wish the film would be re-cut before going to This Bond sucks as surprisingly as Casino surpassed expectations. The problem? In a first, the action sequences have no rhyme, rythym, or reason. Truly, the first such Bond picture in which these are panful and ineffective to watch. Frustrating viewing. he non-action scenes are actually economical gems, but far too brief to enjoy as Bondian. I wish the film would be re-cut before going to DVD. Then I would have something to look forward too (the double DVD release). Instead, I wonder if they even shot enough real action footage to do it. An amazing waste saved only by superior principle actors. Expand
  51. JamesK.
    Nov 16, 2008
    5
    Bond has come to be understood as bullets, bombs and babes... this is where Quantum of Solace goes awry. Yes, it has all that and more, but the movie feels that the plots only purpose is to be the loose threads (read gossamer) that tie all 130min of bullets bombs and babes together. Is it really so dangerous to let actors act that the safer solution is to blow them up? I would hope not. Bond has come to be understood as bullets, bombs and babes... this is where Quantum of Solace goes awry. Yes, it has all that and more, but the movie feels that the plots only purpose is to be the loose threads (read gossamer) that tie all 130min of bullets bombs and babes together. Is it really so dangerous to let actors act that the safer solution is to blow them up? I would hope not. It is a shame that when Casino Royale so perfectly crafts a bond worthy of Connery himself they let it slip right back into the world of unimaginative garbage worthy of Langsby. I only hope that they decide to work a little story and character into the next film. perhaps instead of 90% action 5%sex 5% story, they could strike a more balanced blend. Better luck next time guys Expand
  52. MartyL.
    Nov 16, 2008
    9
    Daniel Craig *IS* Jamed Bond. Loved the story, loved the action. Hated the cinematography and editing. TO DIRECTORS - YOU HAVE AMAZING SET DESIGN PEOPLE, YOU DON'T NEED TO SHAKE THE DAMN CAMERA TO HIDE STUFF... Please... Give us camera shots that lets us SEE the action instead of blurr it!!!
  53. WilliamM.
    Nov 16, 2008
    9
    I have to say, as some one who owns and has watched all the movies and the same goes for all the books. I really liked quantum of solace. I'll agree that it wasn't quite as good as Casino Royale. It was a very lean movie, giving you only the bare minimum to know what was still going on. And in keeping the Bondisms to a minimum I think was a good idea for the series. I don't I have to say, as some one who owns and has watched all the movies and the same goes for all the books. I really liked quantum of solace. I'll agree that it wasn't quite as good as Casino Royale. It was a very lean movie, giving you only the bare minimum to know what was still going on. And in keeping the Bondisms to a minimum I think was a good idea for the series. I don't hope it stays completely lean like this. But I also want new people like Forster to bring new perspective to an old hero. And for being so different I think it will stand out as either a favorite or as a hated movie. I don't want to always know what James Bond will say or do, and after experiencing as much Bond as possible you start to want to see a new take. It will never be as tongue in cheek as Roger moore's movies were. Or as Smooth as Connery. But it's a new type of Bond just like every new actor to play him has put him in a new light. I just don't want to put limits on my favorite series of all time, I don't want the writers to have to include bond... James Bond, or that he has to order his martini and have three girls per movie. I love the old Bonds, and I will always watch them often, but I want the news ones to be fresh as well. I'll make my last sentence an example from Ian Fleming himself. He wrote many books with Bond, with quite a few staples, but they were never mandatory, which made their occurrences more special. Expand
  54. JonB.
    Nov 16, 2008
    7
    All the action missing from Casino Royale with about a quarter of the plot.
  55. JimG.
    Nov 17, 2008
    5
    Poor plot, character development, and script kept this movie from being what it should be.
  56. PeterO
    Nov 17, 2008
    7
    Good but not enough fun, bring back the gadgets.
  57. JacobV.
    Nov 17, 2008
    8
    I love the new bond who doesn't have outrageous gadgets and could actually be a real guy. This movie is great because you see how one dead end turns into a lead that becomes a whole operation. This movie doesn't sugarcoat anything. Bond is ruthless and remorseless. He kills everything.
  58. ScottL.
    Nov 20, 2008
    3
    It was not dificult to tell that the was Forster's first time directing an action scene. The scenes were more than a little conrtived and the cuts made you spend more time wondering who was doing what. The acting was merely average. I never got the feeling that Camille was really all that angry, and Bond seemed more like someone had killed his dog, not his lover. The villain was weak It was not dificult to tell that the was Forster's first time directing an action scene. The scenes were more than a little conrtived and the cuts made you spend more time wondering who was doing what. The acting was merely average. I never got the feeling that Camille was really all that angry, and Bond seemed more like someone had killed his dog, not his lover. The villain was weak and his scheme was boring. All in all, this is one of those movies where I wish I had my time back more than my money. Expand
  59. DavidW.
    Nov 22, 2008
    0
    One terrible scene after another. Action set pieces are incoherent. The drama is dialed down. Craig's muscles are the most impressive thing on display. For the Bond movie with the biggest budget, this was a waste of a lot of money.
  60. DorothyL.
    Nov 23, 2008
    2
    As a woman, I was looking forward to seeing Bond in another speedo, admiring his gorgeous physique and relishing in the delight of some outrageous plot to rule the world. Sadly, I was disappointed. The plot was weak, the bad guy looked creepy and there was no seduction. It was all action and not much else. I still think Daniel Craig is the second best Bond, after Sean Connery and hope As a woman, I was looking forward to seeing Bond in another speedo, admiring his gorgeous physique and relishing in the delight of some outrageous plot to rule the world. Sadly, I was disappointed. The plot was weak, the bad guy looked creepy and there was no seduction. It was all action and not much else. I still think Daniel Craig is the second best Bond, after Sean Connery and hope that the next installment will be a true Bond movie, not an action movie about someone getting revenge for a lost love. Expand
  61. JIMB
    Nov 24, 2008
    10
    this movie is by far better than the all the horror mivies being made today. at least bond uses more realistic toys in the new movies and not all the old gimimicks, car that dissapear, watches that can left 2 people without taking your arm off? Hope the new writers keep it real in the future as well.
  62. JohnnyG.
    Nov 24, 2008
    10
    What's wrong with a little action? Not as good as Casino Royale of course, but still good nonetheless. I had low expectations due to hearing poor reviews from people who had high expectations, so when I went into the film I left feeling very relieved and anything but dissappointed. True, I have not scene any bond film other than a Brosnan's or Craig's, but I have to admit, What's wrong with a little action? Not as good as Casino Royale of course, but still good nonetheless. I had low expectations due to hearing poor reviews from people who had high expectations, so when I went into the film I left feeling very relieved and anything but dissappointed. True, I have not scene any bond film other than a Brosnan's or Craig's, but I have to admit, for what this film was, it was a good one. Expand
  63. DH.
    Nov 20, 2008
    4
    Daniel Craig's physical presence and intensity is definitely a plus for the current Bond series. The action was fast but the plot was a bit vague, giving the impression it was all over too quickly without really knowing what happened. the main drawback I noticed was the subtle anti-American undertones; the American intelligence agent with the moustache that was portayed as a bumbling Daniel Craig's physical presence and intensity is definitely a plus for the current Bond series. The action was fast but the plot was a bit vague, giving the impression it was all over too quickly without really knowing what happened. the main drawback I noticed was the subtle anti-American undertones; the American intelligence agent with the moustache that was portayed as a bumbling oaf, and the sublte comments about "the Americans just in it for the oil". Also; no "Q". I realize they're trying to get away from the sci-fi gadgetry that went overboard during the Brosnan era, but I don't think they should eliminate gadgetry all together. Expand
  64. teriwanT
    Nov 27, 2008
    7
    Worst Bond movie ever? I think not! In fact, I think that was Die Another Day. Ring any bells? Thank you Daniel Craig for reinstating my faith in the franchise. Sure, this film is not perfect, but its a definate step in the right direction. My only two complaints about this one are that the villian could have been more menacing and the action scenes not so poorly edited. Otherwise it was Worst Bond movie ever? I think not! In fact, I think that was Die Another Day. Ring any bells? Thank you Daniel Craig for reinstating my faith in the franchise. Sure, this film is not perfect, but its a definate step in the right direction. My only two complaints about this one are that the villian could have been more menacing and the action scenes not so poorly edited. Otherwise it was a very enjoyable night at the movies for me. I like the fact that they are moulding the character closer to Ian Flemmings original ideas of Bond and not the horrible cheese-and-wine character that Brosnan portrayed with his stupid remarks and lame jokes. Can't wait to see what they will do with the next installment! Expand
  65. Larry
    Nov 28, 2008
    8
    On balance, no better or worse than "Casino Royale." Had its strengths, plus real weaknesses. Craig is a special Bond, as was Connery. The development of his relationship with 'M' has been excellent, probably the best element of two movies. Plot was thin, but not nearly as confusing as I'd been led to believe. Really disliked the denouement scenes in the weird desert hotel. On balance, no better or worse than "Casino Royale." Had its strengths, plus real weaknesses. Craig is a special Bond, as was Connery. The development of his relationship with 'M' has been excellent, probably the best element of two movies. Plot was thin, but not nearly as confusing as I'd been led to believe. Really disliked the denouement scenes in the weird desert hotel. Lacked cleverness and the action was forced on the viewer rather mindlessly. Expand
  66. AS
    Nov 29, 2008
    9
    After watching this movie, I've come to realize that many people (and especially critics) just didn't get it. It's part two of Casino Royale. It is a two-movie storyline that explains why he is who he is and why the love of a woman will never again pull him away from his "job". It wasn't that the plot was weak as many as said. It was simply just an extension of the After watching this movie, I've come to realize that many people (and especially critics) just didn't get it. It's part two of Casino Royale. It is a two-movie storyline that explains why he is who he is and why the love of a woman will never again pull him away from his "job". It wasn't that the plot was weak as many as said. It was simply just an extension of the first movie's plot to wrap up James Bond's introduction to us in this format. There were obvious signs that the next movie will be a new plot in a more traditional Bond way. The first two movies set up who this Bond is...now we go forward. By the way, the entertainment value of this movie is still very high. It is such a good way to introduce the best bond of a new generation. Expand
  67. BaraS.
    Nov 5, 2008
    5
    Nothing special I must say. After great Casino Royale I expected something even better but no. Nothing like that happened. Evil guy is not so evil. Olga Kurylenko is very nice girl but she´s not charismatic Eva Green. Actions are easy to forget. My expectations weren´t fulfilled.
  68. GabrielJ.
    Dec 11, 2008
    5
    well I
  69. JohnD
    Dec 1, 2008
    9
    After readiing the reviews I was expecting to be disappointed, but this Bond movie is one of the most exotic, intelligent and action-packed of all. Some really great sequences - all properly done - (no CGI) - and the close-up / quick cut MTV-style editing places the viewer right in the mayhem. Yes, it's brutal and there are absolutely no Moore-esque one-liners or gadgets, this is a After readiing the reviews I was expecting to be disappointed, but this Bond movie is one of the most exotic, intelligent and action-packed of all. Some really great sequences - all properly done - (no CGI) - and the close-up / quick cut MTV-style editing places the viewer right in the mayhem. Yes, it's brutal and there are absolutely no Moore-esque one-liners or gadgets, this is a Bond for adults. Recommended. Expand
  70. TomC
    Dec 2, 2008
    5
    What Craig gains in the way of brutish subtlety means a loss of the charm and fun people expect from Bond films. Quantum is perfectly average, reaching the quota for explosions and attractive women, however; the plot is convoluted while falling short of being intriguing, the action scene directing is frustratingly scrappy and most disturbingly it seems that the formally flirtatious What Craig gains in the way of brutish subtlety means a loss of the charm and fun people expect from Bond films. Quantum is perfectly average, reaching the quota for explosions and attractive women, however; the plot is convoluted while falling short of being intriguing, the action scene directing is frustratingly scrappy and most disturbingly it seems that the formally flirtatious attitude of Bond films has been abandoned. Expand
  71. DominicG.
    Dec 20, 2008
    9
    Really enjoyed this movie - so much better than expected after reading mised reviews. The Bond team have truly reinvigorated this frachise just when it was on its last legs. A gripping, suspenseful plot that keeps the audience guessing, worthy characters and break neck action sequences. I hope they can maintain this quality standard for the next one.
  72. PeterH
    Dec 2, 2008
    2
    Terrible movie. While Craig has an aura of intensity about him which makes him a wonderful bond, the plot was absolutely terrible. At the beginning I thought that there would be more of a focus on the secretive 'company', but they barely went into that. While I do not like films that are pointlessly dragged out to the extent of wasted time, this was at the opposite extreme; Terrible movie. While Craig has an aura of intensity about him which makes him a wonderful bond, the plot was absolutely terrible. At the beginning I thought that there would be more of a focus on the secretive 'company', but they barely went into that. While I do not like films that are pointlessly dragged out to the extent of wasted time, this was at the opposite extreme; being too short to fulfill the plot or send any message to the audience. It was like trying to fit a 400 pound guy into small size clothing - it does not work. Expand
  73. JackS.
    Dec 4, 2008
    3
    I'm not joking around, what the hell was the point to that movie? It has to be the worst 007 movie ever. The only movie that isn't written by Ian Flemming (he only mad the charecters not the story) turns out to be the worst. I know they could have made something so much better then that. What was the point to all that action? What is the bad thing thats going on right now? Why I'm not joking around, what the hell was the point to that movie? It has to be the worst 007 movie ever. The only movie that isn't written by Ian Flemming (he only mad the charecters not the story) turns out to be the worst. I know they could have made something so much better then that. What was the point to all that action? What is the bad thing thats going on right now? Why is there cars chasing eachother? Is that charecter good or bad? What is Greene trying to do with the world? So many questions are unclear once the movie is over. Everyone who saw it that I know said that they were lost the whole movie. It totally needed more talking and explaining for people to understand what is going on that whole movie. It can't pick off the first movie right when it starts. It is confusing and you have no clue what was going on most of the time until the end. And even still you are still lost in questions what was going on that movie. It was confusing, the action was pointless, it was nothing like the tranditional Bond movies. Ian Flemming is the writer of 007... there is no one else like him. Expand
  74. MarkW
    Dec 9, 2008
    8
    The first Bond film I liked was Casino Royale the second is Quantum of Solace. I just can't stand the cheese associated with most Bond films so the last two instalments are a welcome relief. Still I guess I can understand why Bond fans are bitter, there are plenty of intelligent films out there so perhaps the Bond franchise should stick to what the Bond fans like.
  75. BenW.
    Oct 31, 2008
    9
    Good film. Much faster paced than Casino Royale. Less story more action and that's done incredibly well.
  76. HarryLeech
    Oct 31, 2008
    0
    This is not a James Bond film, i would have given it a 7 or 8 if it wasn't, but james bond does not drive a ford.
  77. DazzerN
    Oct 31, 2008
    9
    The film is nothing short of an adreline rush to head from start to end. Have to give credit to marc foster the director for pulling off a movie like this. I honestly thought daniel craig was a shambles in the beginning of casino royale, but he has proved more than worthy of holding the title 007. One the best bond films i have watched! (P.S I also have to admit I hated the intro song, The film is nothing short of an adreline rush to head from start to end. Have to give credit to marc foster the director for pulling off a movie like this. I honestly thought daniel craig was a shambles in the beginning of casino royale, but he has proved more than worthy of holding the title 007. One the best bond films i have watched! (P.S I also have to admit I hated the intro song, its just not bond style, otherwise would have gave 10!). Expand
  78. Me
    Jan 16, 2009
    0
    Where was the debonair 007? New 007 has no class, no catchy lines that got laughs, and completely lacks any sophistication as other Bond actors. Furthermore, the movie lacked the most entertaining elements: Where were Q and Moneypennie? Where were the cool gadgets we've come to expect to see in all Bond movies? Again I ask where were the "Phrases that Pay"? Furthermore this movie was Where was the debonair 007? New 007 has no class, no catchy lines that got laughs, and completely lacks any sophistication as other Bond actors. Furthermore, the movie lacked the most entertaining elements: Where were Q and Moneypennie? Where were the cool gadgets we've come to expect to see in all Bond movies? Again I ask where were the "Phrases that Pay"? Furthermore this movie was poorly edited. All action scenes were limited to an ungodly half second. They must have not done any retaked for the flubbed scenes and pieced together all the stuff they liked in the end to make it so choppy and hard to watch/follow with your eyes. Gave me a real headache. A true waste of film and the money DH and I spent to see this poorly filmed, acted and letdown of a 007 film. Truly a big letdown compared to Brosnan, Connery, Moore and Lazenby. Expand
  79. wetwebwork
    Nov 14, 2008
    4
    Slept through most of this. Am I in a position to rate it? Perhaps not, but you shouldn't fall asleep in a Bond film. If any film should keep you awake, it should be a Bond.
  80. tdmac
    Nov 14, 2008
    7
    I think Craig's take on Bond is fabulous. He's the best Bond thus far, in my opinion. That being said, I think this movie is a bit all over the place given the multiple story lines that run throughout. Some of them are entirely unnecessary as they do not relate in any way to the characters and occurrences of Casino Royale. Because this movie "intends" to be a sequel to C.R., the I think Craig's take on Bond is fabulous. He's the best Bond thus far, in my opinion. That being said, I think this movie is a bit all over the place given the multiple story lines that run throughout. Some of them are entirely unnecessary as they do not relate in any way to the characters and occurrences of Casino Royale. Because this movie "intends" to be a sequel to C.R., the added stories only succeed in muddying the water. I wanted to see Bond's emotional journey on being betrayed by Vesper and losing her...and to know more about the organization who set all of that into motion. Instead we get too many stories that end up keeping each story diluted. Great for action and "homages" paid to the series. Daniel Craig and Judi Dench, great. I wanted to see more Jeffrey Wright! Expand
  81. ChristianP.
    Nov 14, 2008
    9
    I was worried when I saw the bad reviews, but after seeing the movie myself, I am so relieved. It got off to a bad start with the close-up heavy car chase that was disorienting and then the theme song was terribly produced and I saw that Paul Haggis wrote it and cringed. BUT all of my fears were put to rest. Daniel Craig is wonderful as Bond and Judy Dench steals her scenes. The villain I was worried when I saw the bad reviews, but after seeing the movie myself, I am so relieved. It got off to a bad start with the close-up heavy car chase that was disorienting and then the theme song was terribly produced and I saw that Paul Haggis wrote it and cringed. BUT all of my fears were put to rest. Daniel Craig is wonderful as Bond and Judy Dench steals her scenes. The villain is a great 21st century bad guy--weasely and corrupt but still pure evil. I'm a bit confused with all these bad reviews on here! Honestly, what were the big problems?! Just as gritty as Casino Royale. I would love to see the next one be more of a spy/espionage film than an action movie though. Expand
  82. RyanL.
    Nov 14, 2008
    8
    Serious, focused Bond film, nicely bookending the previous chapter, Casino Royale. It's different from past Bonds, but variety has been what's kept this series going for 45 years.
  83. kyleb
    Nov 14, 2008
    8
    Just got back from a midnight showing. Don't believe the critics. This is a pi$$ed off and obsessed Bond which Craig plays perfectly. For the straight men who are the target audience, it's a rockin' good time, but that leaves out a lot of critics. Only problem I found with it was the villain is pretty weak. One more thing: Best Dialog Ever--at least in a Bond flick. Tightly Just got back from a midnight showing. Don't believe the critics. This is a pi$$ed off and obsessed Bond which Craig plays perfectly. For the straight men who are the target audience, it's a rockin' good time, but that leaves out a lot of critics. Only problem I found with it was the villain is pretty weak. One more thing: Best Dialog Ever--at least in a Bond flick. Tightly written and diamond sharp. The audience was straining to not miss a word, and there were many satisfied laughs at the clever lines. The lack of a 40 minute card game is also a bonus. Expand
  84. MattA.
    Nov 14, 2008
    7
    Ok... so maybe i'm being a little too nice to QoS. I mean...plot wise... it was messy. It used every excuse to get to the next action scene. The "bad guy" was too low-key and not maniacal in the least. The bond girl was nice... but too self- sufficient. So all in all... it wasn't James Bond. Bond himself didn't even seem to be having a good time at all. However... THIS WAS Ok... so maybe i'm being a little too nice to QoS. I mean...plot wise... it was messy. It used every excuse to get to the next action scene. The "bad guy" was too low-key and not maniacal in the least. The bond girl was nice... but too self- sufficient. So all in all... it wasn't James Bond. Bond himself didn't even seem to be having a good time at all. However... THIS WAS NOT TERRIBLE! The action was fun...well...for the audience i suppose. The scenes were beautiful. Casino Royal gave us too much and left us wanting more. Quantum gives us some hamburger to fill the rest of us up...when we were eating steak. Go into Quantum, as i did, expecting to see a decent action movie. Don't go in hoping to be on the edge of your seat with the plot however. Just smile at the pretty things going boom. Expand
  85. chrish
    Nov 14, 2008
    1
    I agree with the Village Voice review - an incomprehensible mess. I don't agree with comparing this film to the Bourne series, because the Bourne series at least had a semblance of a narrative. From the "Where am I? What am I doing?" opening car chase, to the horribly ill-advised homage to Goldfinger's most iconic scene, this film absolutely reeks. The only reason I give it even I agree with the Village Voice review - an incomprehensible mess. I don't agree with comparing this film to the Bourne series, because the Bourne series at least had a semblance of a narrative. From the "Where am I? What am I doing?" opening car chase, to the horribly ill-advised homage to Goldfinger's most iconic scene, this film absolutely reeks. The only reason I give it even a 1 out of 10 - taken as an art film about blind rage, it works on some level. We're lost, disoriented, and, even though Bond and what's-her-name get their revenge in the end, unsatisfied. But "Diamonds are Forever" and "The Spy who loved me" dealt with similar revenge motivation, and they didn't end up looking like a video game tech demo. Expand
  86. JesseB.
    Nov 14, 2008
    10
    Deep, engaging, shot and edited with far more heart and mind then any previous Bond film, Quantum of Solace proves that quality filmmaking to a franchise DOES improve the end result.
  87. Kid
    Nov 15, 2008
    6
    Daniel Craig can be Bond, but the directors won't ALLOW him to reach the pedestal. The last great Bond film was 'Goldeneye'......Bond doesn't need the whole 'Fast-paced-too-quick-for-your-eyes' action sequences - it needs a plan, even if the plan is slowly revealed in both revelation and action - Bond isn't meant to be the way they have lately portrayed Daniel Craig can be Bond, but the directors won't ALLOW him to reach the pedestal. The last great Bond film was 'Goldeneye'......Bond doesn't need the whole 'Fast-paced-too-quick-for-your-eyes' action sequences - it needs a plan, even if the plan is slowly revealed in both revelation and action - Bond isn't meant to be the way they have lately portrayed him. He's a smooth-player, charming, and a planner - and as Roger Ebert said perfectly, not an 'action-hero'. Expand
  88. BrianB.
    Nov 15, 2008
    10
    Daniel Craig continues to push his role in this economical version of bond who acts first and rarely has time to quip. The suave spy in the tailored suit has never been so kinetic and so engagingly brutal.
  89. JeffL
    Nov 15, 2008
    8
    Forget listening to these reviews. If you liked Casino Royale, this is worth seeing to make your own judgment. To me, it was quite good.
  90. sa
    Nov 15, 2008
    5
    Some PG13 movies are so brilliantly written that they overcome the rating burden, like Dark Knight and Casino Royale. However, a lot of PG13 movies, like Quantum of Solace, feel neutered. The story seemed to drag on forever, we've seen the action scenes before, and the characters felt like throwaways. Bond was just emotionally dead in this movie, like the only thing driving him to Some PG13 movies are so brilliantly written that they overcome the rating burden, like Dark Knight and Casino Royale. However, a lot of PG13 movies, like Quantum of Solace, feel neutered. The story seemed to drag on forever, we've seen the action scenes before, and the characters felt like throwaways. Bond was just emotionally dead in this movie, like the only thing driving him to live was revenge. No scene was more evident of this then when he throws his friend's corpse in a trash can, and says coldly, "He doesn't care." It reminded me of the suicidal mess that Will Smith played in I Am Legend. Neither character gave us much reason to root for them. Expand
  91. ChrisG
    Nov 15, 2008
    9
    Great movie, for all of you who complain that hes not "suave", and "charming", go read the original book , yes i mean the guy who invented bond, he was neither of those things. he was a cold hearted prick who left a body count everywhere he went, they are going back to the more realistic TRUE James bond. please do some research before you say what things are supposed to be.
  92. Kelvin
    Nov 15, 2008
    5
    As a stand alone action film it was okay......... as a Bond film it wasn't very satisfying. Bond has kept people flocking to the cinemas for over 40 years precisely because he is Bond. This film however tries hard to strip Bond of all his Bondness. Take the icon Bond Shilouette that shows Bond shooting a gun as viewed from the gun barrel, its always shown at the beginning of the As a stand alone action film it was okay......... as a Bond film it wasn't very satisfying. Bond has kept people flocking to the cinemas for over 40 years precisely because he is Bond. This film however tries hard to strip Bond of all his Bondness. Take the icon Bond Shilouette that shows Bond shooting a gun as viewed from the gun barrel, its always shown at the beginning of the film.......not this time! In Quantum, though we didn't wait to read all the end credits, I've read that they place that on that scene on the end credits! And what about the famous John Barry, James Bond theme, they never play it! (aside fom a few faint piano notes at the beginning) The director Marc Forster was allegedley a James Bond film fan.....well you could have fooled me! Too many traditional Bond trademarks were missing, essentially making Bond little more than a more world weary version of Jason Bourne, surely no coincidence that the guy who was involved in the action sequences also worked on the Bourne films. Bond doesn't have to try and comete with Bourne, they are 2 very different animals but this latest incarnation of Bond blurs that boundary. Let's hope that next time out they bring back Bond in all his glory and yes that includes the iconic opening Bond Shilouette and the Bond theme music. As they say "don't fix what ain't broke"! Expand
  93. MarkB.
    Nov 15, 2008
    9
    Nearly as good as Casino Royale, and better than any bond movie since Connery. The critics got scared to like this one for some reason. Believe me it is worth your time.
  94. wolfiefish
    Nov 15, 2008
    1
    License to Kill is now officially (in my opnion) not the worst Bond movie ever made. Quantum of Solace takes that top spot. Bond had never been so banal. If I wanted to watch ultra violence I would have rented a film about footy hooligans. The action sequences are undecipherable, the dialogue is dull and I've seen better chase scenes from the keystone cops. Boring, boring and even License to Kill is now officially (in my opnion) not the worst Bond movie ever made. Quantum of Solace takes that top spot. Bond had never been so banal. If I wanted to watch ultra violence I would have rented a film about footy hooligans. The action sequences are undecipherable, the dialogue is dull and I've seen better chase scenes from the keystone cops. Boring, boring and even more yawn inducing tat. This film sucks, and should invoke the end of Daniel Craig as Bond. By the way I am a massive Bond fan, and I thought Casino Royale was great, but if this is the way things are going with Bond, then it's time to have a massive re-think. Expand
  95. JoeReviewer
    Nov 15, 2008
    6
    This movie dragged for so long (30-40 mins.) I thought I was going to slip into a coma and never wake up. I was waiting for the usher to hand out mini pillows. The main villian also came off fairly weak and with no real bond nemesis intelligence or BIG evil plan. The movies ending was horrible. In the end you feel dirty like you need a shower and ripped off the only good thing about it is This movie dragged for so long (30-40 mins.) I thought I was going to slip into a coma and never wake up. I was waiting for the usher to hand out mini pillows. The main villian also came off fairly weak and with no real bond nemesis intelligence or BIG evil plan. The movies ending was horrible. In the end you feel dirty like you need a shower and ripped off the only good thing about it is that it ended. Expand
  96. RichardT.
    Nov 15, 2008
    5
    Action but no sex for England.
  97. AndyM.
    Nov 16, 2008
    5
    I'm no rabid Bond fan, so this review won't be based on Quantum's adherence to the books or how it compares Sean Connery's films. In a nutshell, this movie had no great plot. It tried to be intellectual, but the plot was just a mess. So one would think action would make up for all of this, right? Well, there is a LOT of action, but I hate how it was shot. The car chase I'm no rabid Bond fan, so this review won't be based on Quantum's adherence to the books or how it compares Sean Connery's films. In a nutshell, this movie had no great plot. It tried to be intellectual, but the plot was just a mess. So one would think action would make up for all of this, right? Well, there is a LOT of action, but I hate how it was shot. The car chase at the beginning has a camera so frantic and jumpy that it's nearly impossible to decipher what's going on. It gets a little better after this, but not much. The "Bond girl" in this movie got a lot of hype, but she wasn't THAT good looking. The complete and utter lack of sex didn't ruin the movie, but it certainly could've helped things. Oh, and there are no gadgets, save for... touchscreen technology, which is so 2 years ago. So why a 5? It's got some stunning scenes (when you can see what's going on) and Daniel Craig plays a cool Bond, so that helps. This is... a rentable, I think. Expand
  98. WilliamB.
    Nov 16, 2008
    7
    Daniel Craig is fine, but this film is too uptight! Sometimes the action set-pieces are confusing and incoherent.
  99. DougN.
    Nov 16, 2008
    7
    Lacks the humor and gadgets of past Bond films. Where is Q, for example? But overall, I liked it. Seems a bit "darker" than any of the past Bond films.
  100. JohnB.
    Nov 16, 2008
    9
    I don't think bond encountered anyone, that was not mi6, in the first 45 min without killing them, awesome. lots of action, a great film.
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 38
  2. Negative: 2 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: Kim Newman
    80
    As with "The Dark Knight," the only real caveat is that while it's exciting and imaginative, it's not exactly anyone's idea of fun. To keep in the game, perhaps the next movie could let the hero enjoy himself a bit more.
  2. Reviewed by: Jay Slater
    60
    Quantum of Solace may be explosive with images of fiery infernos, but it's convoluted and confusing, the plot playing second fiddle to its set pieces.
  3. The new picture allows hardly any flourishes of style and character in the 007 tradition, but moviegoers seeking an adrenaline rush will be well pleased.